0
stringlengths 9
22.1k
|
|---|
It's not different. Authorities cannot open a safe if they cannot state what's in it and how they know it. The standard isn't "there's bad things in there" the standard is xyz file is in there, we know this because someone heard, saw or otherwise came to know of the existence of the file and it's location.
This case the cops had a lot of circumstantial evidence that this particular individual was trading in CP but they weren't positive. Since they needed to prove that the accused was in fact the person trading in the illegal material they needed some illegal material. Well if the accused decrypts the files it will prove that he was the one who encrypted them or at least is in the chain of people who owned those files. This is just like opening the safe. However if the cops break into the safe (or break the encryption) that doesn't add to the custody chain so can be used as evidence which was not provided by the accused.
In one of the cases the Judge explains that if the files are produced everyone knows they didn't fall out of the sky like mana from heaven and the person producing them is incriminating themselves by producing them.
Let's look at the blood samples. The cops say we pulled over so and so and determined that they smelled of alcohol etc... We need to draw their blood because we are confident that we will find the presence of alcohol in an amount greater than .08 (or whatever). That is very direct.
That is different than grabbing you at the mall and testing you for drugs. Why do they suspect it? Who do they suspect? Do you have to do anything which incriminates yourself? |
It really depends. What cops do to obtain evidence and what evidence is actually admissible at trial may be vastly different things.
Warrants are issued for specific items in specific places. Can cops tear a hole in your wall? Maybe if they can prove to a judge that there is reason to believe the items they seek are in there.
The cops don't just go to 123 Main Street and start looking for drugs and CP. The cops come into possession of information that says someone at 123 Main Street has marijuana (for example). They try to independently verify this using a confidential informant additional sources or whatever they can to establish based on a series of facts that there is probable cause to believe that there is marijuana in 123 Main St.
If the cops have no knowledge of a safe or the fact that there might be drugs in it then it creates some questions. Maybe it's reasonable to assume that someone would keep drugs in a safe and since they already know there are drugs in the house the safe is merely holding known evidence and the owner could be compelled to open it as it doesn't add substantially to the case.
However a judge might say no the accused doesn't have to open it because they want to argue they didn't put it there and their opening it will harm their defense. The cops didn't know about the safe and can't be sure it belongs to the accused so it's possible the judge would rule that having the accused comply would make them incriminate themselves. |
Attorney here. This headline is REALLY mislead.
First, its not that stealing code is not a crime under federal law, but rather it is not a crime under the National Stolen Property Act. There could be many other federal laws or theories he could be charged under.
Second, we are only talking about FEDERAL law. There are still state laws that could apply. In fact, things like theft are typically handled under state law.
Third, not only could there be state criminal charges, but there could be civil suits under both State and Federal law. |
As a matter of rebuttal to the popular opinion here on reddit, I'd like to point at that, while this person overgeneralized the situation, when applied to the particular AT&T/T-Mobile case, he is absolutely correct. The merger would have resulted in better efficiency not only for AT&T and T-Mobile, but also for their customers. As an AT&T customer I was rooting for this merger so that my iPhone 4G could actually operate on a 4G network, T-Mobile customers were also rooting for this so they could use their phones (and not pay roaming) where AT&T had better coverage (granted, they probably didn't like the idea of being an AT&T customer, but that's a different discussion). It would have been a win-win for business and consumer alike. Where the FCC failed was in valuing the opinions of 3rd party individuals with no interest in the merger who looked at it with purely ideological considerations, and zero practical consideration for parties involved. |
Let me preface this by saying I hate cases, so MAYBE I'm bias, but I have dropped my iPhone COUNTLESS times, once a week maybe, and I have NO scratches, NO shatters, nothing. The iPhone is a very sturdy piece of equipment, one drop isn't going to shatter it, I promise you.
Looking at my unprotected iPhone now, I have no scratches whatsoever.
When you're finally done with your iPhone, you take off all the ridiculous protection and you're left with a perfect-quality iPhone... which goes into storage forever (unless you sell or bin it). What was the point of that, then? You've enjoyed your iPhone less as it's been covered and obscured with all this cheap crap. A proper drop will shatter the internals, and that's all that is important. No hard plastic will stop that. |
i'd like to know how having several companies competing to serve an identical product is more efficient, cost effective and better for the consumer than having a municipally or government run ISP monopoly in any situation or place.
If anyone could become an ISP and serve anyone else, you would see those things (efficiency, cost effectiveness, consumer friendliness). The conditions generally assumed by economists for a free market (where competition is a positive force) are:
a) homogenous product
b) easy entry/exit
Companies have a very hard time turning large profits in a free market (their competitors just undercut their margins and take their volume). Thus, most companies end up trying to change the game with either (a) or (b). This is why you see razors with eighteen blades: they're "different" than the razors with just seventeen blades.
Now, monopolies (or oligopolies) are the area where firms try and change (b). They often do this in markets with economies of scale: start-up costs prevent other competitors from easily entering the market. When they are the only game in town, they can charge you just below what you're willing to pay instead of just above what their product takes to make. This means that they capture your consumer surplus; they gain and you lose.
Government oversight generally leads to a higher cost for government-run or regulated enterprises. Whether this cost is greater than the overall loss in consumer surplus (which can be measured in ISP profits) is the ultimate issue at stake. |
I came to a similar conclusion. My mantra became "I am not the sum of what was done to me, I define myself by how I allow it to affect me". I thought it sounded kinda cool.
However, while I was able to over come much of the damage of an abusive childhood there were many people I knew that couldn't do it. If your story is anything like mine this catharsis came many years after the abusive years, which you said were a constant thing up until you finished school. I presume that's because you found the means to extricate yourself from the antagonistic circumstance for more favourable ones. You got some breathing space where things weren't as bad and you could reflect that times had changed.
You seemed to imply that while you were embroiled in the abusive circumstance you couldn't get that footing to obtain your now resilient frame of mind.
For a great many, What keeps people from overcoming their abuse is that they can't get out of their situation. I've known people for years that are still being ground down by circumstance past the school years. They don't get the chance to heal and grow from the experience because the circumstances don't change and are beyond their ability to do anything about it.
I would finally submit that comparing being seen in the loser category of school and overcoming that doesn't equate to what a great many more have to go through. And I don't say that to take anything from what you've achieved because that is significant.
I would say that I wasn't just a loser, I was a freak and a foreigner. I was in the West of Ireland with an American accent and the non stop vitriol that came about simply because of the way I talked was insane and wounded me deeply in virtually all ways. The wounds healed, sure, but the scars are quote evident I assure you. There was fuck tons of other things during and after school at home mind you, but I'm staying on just the verbal side of the discussion. Cause just the verbal parts of parental abuse would take to long.
Now the internet is a different beast. I don't give a fuck what anyone says to me online cause the whole anonymity thing makes it very unreal for me. But in social media, the media or just out in the world, like Batman, I don't want anyone to have to go through what I've had too. Even though it has made me stronger in many ways, I'm very much less of the person I could have been.
Just because it worked out that way for you, doesn't mean everybody is as lucky to be able to look back and suck it up. |
This is in effect everywhere in the US, and is strictly followed. The difference you hear is a problem of dynamic range. When you set your volume for a TV show, most of the sounds will be in the middle of the range. Louder sounds will be sound louder, and softer sounds softer. This is exactly what you'd expect.
However, when a commercial is made, they compress the dynamic range. All the sounds fall within about 1/4 of the range of a TV show. As a result, they are able to shift the mid-point much higher than a TV show, and still meet the requirements. |
Weellll kind of. If the entire staff of a public library with two stories, janitor and all, were to take turns handling the logistics is could still take years. First, for it to happen this century, they'd have to destroy the bindings of each book so the pages could be fed directly into the machine. Otherwise they'd have to use something [like this]( and manually turn the pages. I doubt the libraries could afford more than one scanner and a book like harry potter could take a good while to scan. After it's all scanned, I'd bet a good amount of money there is no program that automatically renames a huge pdf file like that and publishes it to the web in a manner that makes it easy to search for.
And about the website itself, where is the hosting? Adding so many high-res pdf files is going to make a what was maybe an html text only website under 10 MBs, to something x^5 power bigger. Are the librarians going to be tech-savy enough to do all of this efficiently? Probably not. People on reddit forget that while using some pre-configured CMS for a website might be like learning which buttons on a a controller do what on a new game, for many it would be like navigating a huge labyrinth.
Well they should share resources then! Have some scan some books, and some scan others. Once again, that's a giant logistical hurdle. However [Overdrive Media]( does a great job. You have to have a library card from the specific library to check out the book and only about 1 or 2 people can check out a book at a time.
The truth is, an economics professor could probably explain this problem better. There is still a "cost" associated with pirating and especially games. But, there is also less "risk". I'm a lot more likely to not enjoy a game I bought from Origin and want my money back than I am to get caught pirating. There's also the cost of extra time it takes to install a pirated game, but sometimes with things like Origin it can actually take longer. Then of course most games have a built in auto updater. If I pirate a game and I'm experiencing a huge bug, I have to wait for an update to come out, plus the time it takes for a torrent to be created with it. In the end, all I want to do is play video games. If everyone did what my favorite 4x RTS [Sins of a Solar Empire]( did, everyone would be happier. The dev Iron Clad and the producer Stardock said forget trying to protect it from being cracked, that cost money and it won't work. They instead gave open beta testing to people who pre-ordered the game, made it cheaper than a lot of new computer games, and planned three expansion packs for cheap after the first release. |
I never claimed to know anything about networking, and you understood my point perfectly.
You pretty much ignored the fact that you "forgot" that you were referring to a 1GBps connection rather than "a few hundred MBps". That makes your post and my refutation to it invalid, as I would never argue a consumer broadband testing tool would be up for rating carrier-grade links.
TCP Windowing etc - yes - all applies - but not valid to my original post as stated in sentence above. |
The issue is you cant do what you want to with something you own. Therefore you don't really own it. It's illegal for me to root and unlock the bootloader on my phone but not illegal for me to smash it with a hammer. Apply it to something else; you buy a car, cash, its yours 100% but you cant put in a bigger engine or change the exhaust or add a wing. That's fucking silly. If I buy something its mine and I will do what I choose.
As far as phones go, I got a G1 when they first released, rooted it and slapped Cyanogenmod on it at version 3ish. Since that point all my phones have had custom roms. G2, hours after getting the phones i rooted them. Yesterday I got an lg optimus g, minutes later it had a custom rom on it. I want a clean simple OS that is tailored to making my phone fast and efficient. Just like with computers a clean os vs a store bought one runs better. |
I remember the article stated that Time Warner said that customer's didn't want Gigabit connections, not that we didn't need it. The bandwidth is there. I have a feeling in Time Warner's survey they included a proposed price. I wouldn't want Gigabit internet at the price TWC would charge; I seriously doubt they would offer Gigabit at Google's price of $70 when their 50Mbps is $75. |
Looking at others stories and thoughts about their new share everything data plan I thought I would chime in and tell you my experience with verizon.
Back just before they started their share everything data plans, I decided I was going to get off my parent's family plan, get my own plan and upgrade my phone before their new plans so that 1) I could take responsibility of my phone bill and 2) Get a new phone.
Unfortunately I didn't have the money at the beginning of the month to do it but two days prior to the actual switch happening I had the funds to drop some money on a new phone and new account. Because I didn't have any credit at the time I knew I was going to have to pay their $400 deposit fee for starting a new account and then the additional money for the new phone, I told the rep that I would just pay the $400 I KNEW I was going to have to pay, but he still made me go through the credit score check.
Called up verizon to get my phone line switched off of my parents plan, this was easy to do. But what comes next was a nightmare. They required that I send in my SS # and a copy of my Driver's License, easy right? Well turns out their fax machine printed it and it was too dark to read. I had to run to staples AGAIN and pay the $ to send another fax.
Got home called verizon up again and waited on hold for over 30 minutes. They still couldn't read it, so they asked if I could go to a local verizon store and have them try to fax it. This time I go in with a piece of paper with 5 different copies of my drivers license in various different brightness/contrast and size to see if that would help. The local verizon store is not an official verizon store so they cannot verify my information for me, so they faxed it in.
The store representative then called up verizon to continue the setup while I was there. They still could not read it. The guy at the verizon store was extremely shocked at how they were not able to read the sent fax.
Then came the next day, the day before the final switch happened. I tried sending my driver's license copy three more times, each from a different store/copy machine and all of them "failed." Because I had to work I was not able to call them up until later that evening but when I did, I was told that even if I can't get this solved before the data plan changes, they would make sure that my unlimited data stays after the change. I asked to talk to the supervisor there and I told him I was sick and tired of faxing my driver's license just to hear they can't read it.
He gave me an email to send a PDF version of the copy to instead of faxing, gee after the 3rd try why wouldn't you offer this to me? Because it was late I didn't get an email response until the next day, the day the data plan changes happened. I finally got my confirmation email saying that I was finally verified or whatever. When I called in to finally pay my $400 deposit fee (as I had predicted) and then the additional $300 for a GS3, I was told "Yes, you will keep unlimited data." After paying over the phone and then getting my invoice in my email I looked at it and saw that my new data plan will be switched to 5GB. I called back to confirm and was told "Yes, your data plan will be changed to 5GB/month," despite being promised my Unlimited data. Cancelled my new phone purchase and have been going on a shitty HTC Thunderbolt without a contract since.
I would switch to another phone company, however Verizon is the only one with the absolute most coverage here. |
But in reality, [subsidy means high-interest loan]( in the mobile phone business.
I am QUITE happy that I completely own my $300 Galaxy Nexus, and that I can take it anywhere in the world at the drop of a hat. I'm also QUITE happy that I only pay $30/month for 5GB of 4G data with T-Mobile prepaid, which I can also decide to leave whenever I want/need. I don't even use more than 2GB, and I'm still saving BOATLOADS over what I paid at Verizon. |
All I'm getting from this is large corporations are pretending they don't understand how people feel about their products/services and are basically baiting people to form a civil union of consumers which they assume will never happen and it'll be business as usual.
What if it happened though? The internet affords everyone a voice and if them listening to us is anything like the way politicians listen to their constituents, 1000 voices = 1 million voices. Consider how many people frequent Reddit alone, and how much influence Reddit has had in the past in all stages of media and government. In one fell swoop we could get companies to use the subsidies our tax money gives them in order to lower prices and continue to build out their own infrastructure, to make them incorporate fair business practices like disallowing the oligarchy of ISPs and maybe politicians would grow some metaphorical balls and realize that they should act in our interests and not corporations even though they view them as people as well... I'm still pissed about that one. (the last bit about politicians was really ideological on my part and a admittedly large leap from the rest of my argument)
Edit for |
When I saw the news that "Verizon CEO says he would happily drop cell phone contracts, if customers demand it (bgr.com)" I immediately contacted VZW support and I 'demanded a change' in the contract and phone subsidy practices.
It appears that many people did the same. I bolded what I think is an important part of the reply.
If you haven't contacted VZW customer service about getting rid of contracts and moving toward monthly access fees that are not paying for a phone you own, now would be a good time to click:
Hi,
First, I would like to apologize for the delay in responding to your email. We have received an overwhelming amount of emails lately and are trying our best to catch up. Generally, our goal is to respond within 48 hours, but this has been impacted and causing us to respond later than we had hoped. I can definitely understand the interest of wanting to drop cell phone contracts and I appreciate you reaching out to us about this. I have actually read the online thread and the CNET article and have been getting a lot of feedback about it.
We do take all of our customer’s feedback very seriously as we try our best to make the change hat our customers want to see. It was our customers that actually came up with the concept of the Share Everything Plans and this was implemented so maybe this will also change. I have forwarded your feedback along to our Marketing Department for review. Although there is not a way that I can guarantee that this will go into effect, your voice will definitely be heard and considered based on other customer’s views.
If you need anything else, please let me know. I would be happy to help. Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to assist you. We appreciate your business and thank you for being the best part of Verizon Wireless, our customer. I hope you have a great week!
Sincerely,
Shana
Verizon Wireless
Customer Service
If you have received this e-mail in error or are not the intended recipient, please notify us immediately by replying to this e-mail and deleting it and all copies and backups thereof. If you are the intended recipient and are a Verizon Wireless customer, this response is subject to the terms of your Customer Agreement. |
I don't think we really need to get anywhere so fast. I'm perfectly fine with the internet being a free market in the purest sense of the word - where companies are the only ones with access to private information, there is no government presence whatsoever, and companies are held responsible by their shareholders for their privacy practices.
If a website can't handle securing their services and fall victim to cybercrime, then that website should become defunct. As things would stand under CISPA, companies that bungle their network security and botch their privacy protections can point to the offenders and say, "well they're bad people and hackers, and the government's going after them now, see! It's not our fault that we're inept, they're the ones threatening national security by attacking our systems!"
I suppose I've become more and more conservative/libertarian on this issue over the years, but I like the idea of the internet being a completely unregulated wilderness, where both the risks and the rewards are high. Failing to protect your consumers is not the fault of the hackers, it's the fault of your inept infosec division. |
Adobe has just shot itself in the face. I'm a member of a couple of major photography forums and the prevailing attitude among the pros on each site is screw em then. Since most guys seem to be more than happy with CS6 or LR 4.4 they pretty much said well until such time as these no longer work with newer cameras or file formats I'm staying put.
I know personally having cut my teeth on PS in high school and then looked at alternatives like GIMP because I support open source I think this move will really fuel the adobe alternatives already on the market. I personally did come back to adobe since I bought a copy of LR on a student discount for $20 with that said now that I'm out of school and no longer qualify for the student pricing I'm not sure if I'll bother upgrading. True LR will remain a standalone product (Thank GOD!) but on principle I would resist ugprading as I think what adobe has just announced is complete horseshit for the consumer. |
Because the bit torrent protocol was not invented just so you could download terabytes of shitty movies, you jackass. You're exactly the kind of person the big media companies are thinking about when they're trying to fuck everyone over torrenting stuff. WoW used torrents to distribute patches. Most Linux distros can be torrented. For completely free, legal and useful software torrent is the ideal distribution method, it saves you having to shell out for tons of servers to host your files and ensures that it's always readily available for download.
Tools that would also benefit from torrent distribution that allow circumvention of copy-protection for non-infringement means are of the utmost importance when trying to get things to work on platforms the developers didn't initially think of, it also allows perfectly legal modifications to existing software that enhances it's capabilities.
These changes to the DMCA remove it's all encompassing criminalisation of those tools and methods of distribution and that's a great thing for everyone, especially innovative software engineers. |
Please correct any information that isn't up to date, this is my perspective and as always I admit I am not the holder of absolute truth.)
As someone who knows mobile techonology pretty well... I've unlocked/jailbroken before and am decently familiar with the issue.
Unlocking, is illegal, but carriers will unlock the phone for you in the store. You may ask, "Why is it illegal for me to do it, but carriers can do it in store for me?"
Stolen phones.
In my experience, most of the time when someone wants their phone unlocked it is because the phone is "blacklisted", which means it was either lost/stolen or the original owner didn't pay his bills.
If you take it into the carrier, they will unlock it for you (free of charge if you are a subscriber). The only reason they don't want you to unlock it yourself is because if it "legal" to unlock phones on a mass scale, phone robberies will go up. There are ways of manipulating the MEID number (especially on iPhones). The whole process of unlocking is meant to put a phone on a different network when it shouldn't be. |
Several.
There is dispersion: This is a measure of the incident light pulse "spreading" over the course of its journey down the fiber. This is caused by various physical phenomenon within the fiber optic cable such as intramodal dispersion (basically different modes of light travelling down a medium experience different refractive indices and therefore the pulse "spreads" so to speak). So, if you were to send pulses of light with clear separation at the source, they may spread and begin overlapping with each other at a certain distance, where obviously you begin degrading the original signal. We also get polarization mode dispersion, where we see the same phenomenon as described above except this time its caused by different polarization of the incident beam experiencing slightly different refractive indices due to 'birefringence' - the geometry and composition of the fiber not being exactly symmetrical in the x and y axes, for instance.
We also have attenuation based on the material the fiber is made from. This is generally measured in dBm of power lost per kilometer over the fiber.
And we are still not done. Say we manage to get our light to the optical receiver with satisfactory signal integrity. Now the receiver itself produces several kinds of noise. In fact, the operation of the receiver itself is so dependent on noise, that its sensitivity is defined by the incident optical power required to make the signal to noise ration equal to 1. These noise sources are quantum shot noise (noise produced by the statistical nature with which electron-hole pairs are generated in the active medium of the receiver when an incident photon hits it), dark current (a small current that is generated in the photoreceiver with ZERO incident light striking it), and thermal noise (a small temperature dependent current generated by the electrical properties of the receiver).
Therefore, when designing a photonic communication system, noise is THE end-all be-all. In fact, generally a system designer will have access to a thousand charts describing quantities such as the Bit-Rate Error vs. Incident power, the dispersion in a certain type of fiber at a given wavelength of light etc., which the designer will then use to determine exactly what type of fiber and receiver a system will require JUST so that the noise does not fuck up the received signal. |
It's already here, I had a work-mate who's house and extended families houses were raided after they were stopped on account of having the Koran on CD playing in his car. Thinking about it, that was actually 10 years ago. In the wake of September the 11th. But that's the point, there wasn't a real reason or excuse, but the houses were still raided.
This could happen to you, for any tenuous reason or just that your face looks like it would be better on the floor. |
As much as I don't agree with what the NSA is allegedly doing, this is a recruiting session and not the right place (or the right people) to be asking these questions to. These kids are essentially harassing NSA employees that aren't directly involved in the whole surveillance mess; they're fucking recruiters, just simply doing their jobs. Someone commented earlier saying it's like yelling at a salesperson for a company when they're not even directly responsible for what their company is doing.
I'm also assuming that there are different levels of clearance that NSA employees have. Could it be possible many of them were kept in the dark (including these recruiters) on what was really going on? And now these students are just grilling people who are completely disassociated from what was happening behind the scenes.
Also someone said that these people are recruiting students to work for them and against the American people. Really?... You're not forced to work for anyone. They may be spying on you without your consent (again, I don't agree with that) but they're not forcing you to work for them without your consent. I'm going to assume these students are smart people and can judge for themselves if this is an organization they want to be a part of.
Also there are probably students there that are genuinely interested in the career and it's unfair to them. Just saying. |
Some DoD contractor in Rockville MD out of nowhere called me and said that I could start working an entry level Cyber Security job out of school (went to school for Computer Security) So like any college grad I was like WOW! SURE! We discussed a lot of things and I actually had to go through a top secret clearance background check. It took months, I had to sign non disclosure forms, non compete clause, all this crazy shit before I actually even started working.
Come 4 months later they told me I had my security clearance but they had to do cut some people, and being I was new (not even starting the job, not even MOVING to MD) I was also cut.
Hm. It felt sketchy.
I told the investigator the whole story when I was going through the clearance and she even said most people who get there clearance start working first then get the clearance. Most companies wont shell out the money on someone to get the clearance who they don't even know. Or even met.
I have done a lot of research on the company and they were very legit. Other then the bad Glassdoor reviews they got. |
Here is my story about a recruiter from ITT tech showing up at my high school. So here comes this guy, he is funny as hell. The whole time he is being the ultimate dude bro literally be friending everyone. At the end of his talk he says something about how he is from ITT and then drops recruiting sheets on us. Everyone was memorized about his words that they all signed the sheets. Anyways, I go to the school and check it out. It' shit. Soul sucking and lifeless. The sad part is that the counselor said it was the largest ITT tech campus in the state, it was only one small building. Strangely enough another recruiter from another school came to our class and I fell for the same shit until she dropped the recruiting paper. |
Really? Treason? While I understand the legal ramifications (actual and potential) here; I must ask a few questions.
What does shouting at recruiters accomplish?
And, more importantly:
What was ACTUALLY being accomplished by the NSA because of this program?
Nobody in the US government will answer that question, but its the most important. The answer would kill any (remaining) benefits of the program, but maybe it would show people that it was worth it. And maybe it would show it was not. The point I'm trying to make is that maybe the government had a really good reason to do what they did. And maybe they did their jobs a little better because of it.
That's a lot of maybe's, I know, but we will never know the answers to these things if we behave like tantrum-throwing children and scream angry things at people who are doing their job. Which is, largely, protecting US citizens from potential threats.
Sorry this is a novel, I just feel as though it's really easy to criticize and arm-chair-govern when you don't know the severity of the shit that is out there.
* |
What does shouting at recruiters accomplish?
Hopefully it changes their minds about their jobs and they quit or do something like Snowden did, you know, the right thing. It's an appeal to their consciences to stop recruiting teens to work against Americans. Or maybe represent the true values of their org by stating "you should apply for a job with the NSA so you can spy on Americans and their allies, treating us all like the enemy. You will never sleep at night again and you will have difficulty living with yourself, but apply now!"
> What was ACTUALLY being accomplished by the NSA because of this program?
They said it was keeping us safe from the "terrorists"!!1 Which was proven a lie.
> The point I'm trying to make is that maybe the government had a really good reason to do what they did.
They think they did, but it was unconstitutional and they're guilty of treason as a result. I'm sure the Gestapo thought it was doing what was right and had good reasons too.
> tantrum-throwing children and scream angry things at people who are doing their job.
Which is not at all what happened. Calling people out, confronting people and expecting them to act like humans with a conscience is always welcome. It's a standard we should hold all of our government officials to.
> Which is, largely, protecting US citizens from potential threats.
That's highly debatable.
> Sorry this is a novel, I just feel as though it's really easy to criticize and arm-chair-govern
Armchair govern, lol, ya, we should leave it to the experts! Democracy, do you understand it? The people that made this possible and hired the fuckers that enacted this bullshit are elected representatives of the people they do not exist to govern on their own accord, they exist to do what the American people elected them to do. They exist to uphold the constitution of the United states. Not breach it when they see fit.
> |
Student: "By your definition there is none who is not an adversary? ... Is Germany an adversary?"
...
Recruiter: "So for us. Um. Our business ... we dont generate the requirements. um. There was a requirement for an issue, we might use the word target, that is the intelligence target whether that is adversary or whatever..." |
What "terrorists" are you talking about?
To the entire world, Americans are the terrorists. No Muslim or suicide bomber has caused a fraction of the misery and death of America.
Instead of devoting the remnants of your dying economy to preventing terrorist attacks, you could stop spending trillions of dollars on the military that causes them... but at this point, after watching your government demand control of every continent on the planet in the past couple of weeks, most of the world is probably starting to think that the passively complicit American populace might deserve any retaliation it gets. |
The recruiters should not have had to prepare for this.
Most recruiters are just low level employees that are excited about talking to students from their home university. They go to meet with the younger generation, give a candid account of what the job is like, and look for potential hires.
With the NSA being a headline for the past few weeks, the recruiters should have anticipated a few prodding questions; however, I feel the students were over the top here. The recruiters probably weren't expecting to be recorded, field legal questions, or defend policy (which was mandated by congress, directed by the president, and supervised by FISA court).
What did the students expect, that the NSA recruiters would publicly lambaste their bosses or discuss the legality of the actions of their organization? The students' questions were ridiculous and probably ruined the experience for anyone there that legitimately was interested in the organization. |
I thought that data was to be only sifted through when PROBABLE CAUSE was presented by government officials/agencies
Let me put it in a more tangible sense. Suppose the government installed cameras everywhere, and (via whatever means, biometric or otherwise) somehow stored information on where everyone was and who they spoke to and what places they visited. Suppose this also included what stores and such they visited and and when, all of which you could discover by asking questions of the public. They take all this information and store it in a really, really big database.
The government claims they haven't broken any laws because there was no active search and seizure of private information; this is all information that technically is available to any witness on the street. And suppose they aren't really even sifting through all that information, they say they only look through it when, for whatever reason, your name comes up.
The problem here is multifaceted. (1) The government has found a way around the "no search and seizure without a warrant problem." They have collected (seized) all this information under the guise that "it's public information," when otherwise this information would have had to be issued a warrant and legally seized from private citizens, or otherwise freely given by the public.All of this information can now be perused at will, regardless of whether that person was initially suspected of some sort of nefarious activity, i.e., no warrant. Even with a warrant, the information to be seized must be spelled out. But who I've communicated with and how often I did that by default has no bearing on any illegal activity when there's no illegal activity . (2) Many fear that, while they may not actively sift through this information now, that with such a large stockpile of information, the temptation to use this information for other purposes might be too much to handle when there's no warrant for this data. Without oversight, there's nothing to stop a boundless increase of power. (3) Many question whether this sort of public data should be accessible in the first place, simply because it's communication. There's nothing illegal with sending a letter by private courier to someone. But we would all lose our minds if the government started asking "Hey we're just keeping tabs on this sort of thing just in case. We need to know who sent that letter and when and who it's going to." I think most people would agree that's an invasion of privacy. But for some reason we view this metadata thing as not a big deal. |
The reason I bring that particular point up is because Rand Paul filibustered for 12 hours to get a declaration from the justice department on whether or not the Whitehouse had the authority to do just that.
the |
Mike Rogers is a Congressman from my state. I sent an email to his office when the NSA phone program defunding was shot down last week, and received an enormous email back that was fully of lies. Here it is, in all of its verbose deceit:
>Thank you for contacting me with your concerns regarding the protection of your Fourth Amendment rights. I appreciate hearing from you on this important issue.
As chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, it is my responsibility to ensure strict and thorough congressional oversight of the important work done by America’s intelligence agencies. I have been disheartened by dangerous national security leaks that have grossly distorted two vital National Security Agency programs that have proved very effective in preventing terror attacks in the U.S. without infringing on Americans’ privacy and civil liberties.
At a time when the Obama administration’s IRS, Benghazi and Justice Department scandals have understandably damaged Americans’ trust in their government, it is important to understand why these programs are different. Neither program allows the NSA to read e-mails or listen to phone calls of American citizens. Both programs are constitutional and do not violate any American’s Fourth Amendment rights. Both are strictly overseen by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, a federal court created in 1978 to protect the rights of American citizens in the course of foreign intelligence gathering.
There are also several layers of checks and balances put in place around these programs within the executive branch and Congress. Both programs are overseen by lawyers and compliance auditors from the Department of Justice, the director of national intelligence and multiple independent inspectors general. Both have also been authorized by large bipartisan majorities in Congress and are regularly reviewed by the House and Senate intelligence committees. The effectiveness of these programs is without question. Both have produced vital intelligence that has prevented dozens of terrorist attacks within the U.S. and around the world.
The first program allows the NSA to preserve a limited category of business records to help identify foreign terrorists and their plots to attack the U.S. This court-authorized program allows NSA to preserve only phone records such as the numbers dialed and the date, time and duration of calls. These records do not include the names or personal information of any American and do not include any content of calls.
>When the NSA wants to query the records, it must establish through a court-approved process that there is a reasonable suspicion a specific number is connected to a foreign terrorist. Only a limited number of analysts can obtain approval to conduct a narrow and targeted search of those numbers. If U.S. connections are found, they are passed to the FBI for further investigation. If the FBI wants to determine the identity of a phone number resulting from an NSA search, they must obtain a separate court order. These call record searches, which are regularly audited for compliance by all three branches of government, are a vital tool for connecting the dots between foreign terrorists plotting attacks in the U.S. and in other countries.
The second program, known as PRISM, allows the NSA to obtain a court order to access the electronic communications of suspected foreign terrorists overseas. Because much of the world’s Internet traffic flows through U.S. infrastructure, the law allows the NSA to obtain the specific communications of foreign suspects from U.S. companies with a court order. This program does not create a “back door” to any U.S. company’s server. This program cannot and does not monitor the communications of any U.S. citizens.
All 535 members of Congress have had access to classified briefings describing the specific uses of these two programs, though not all members have chosen to attend these briefings.
It is important to consider the source of the news media leaks about these two vital intelligence programs. These leaks came from a person not involved in the careful execution of these programs, and with access to only small pieces of a larger puzzle. He decided to break the law and the oath he took to the American people by publicly disclosing parts of these classified programs, and then fled to China. These are the actions of a felon, not a whistle-blower.
>The effectiveness of these programs depends on them being kept secret from the foreign terrorists they target. It is much easier for terrorists to hide from us if they understand the sources and methods of our intelligence gathering. We have already seen al-Qaeda begin to shift their communication tactics as a result of these leaks, and it will now be much harder for us to find them.
It is no coincidence that the leaders from across the American political spectrum who take the time to understand these important programs are also their strongest supporters. They understand that these narrowly targeted programs are legal, do not invade Americans’ privacy rights, and are essential to detecting and disrupting future terrorist attacks.
Rest assured I take the privacy rights of Americans very seriously. As Chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence I will continue vigilant oversight of these programs to ensure they are not abused and would never allow such techniques to be used against American citizens, without due process. For a link to the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence hearing on the issue, please click here:
Again, thank you for contacting me. Please keep in touch with any additional questions or concerns.
Sincerely,
Signature
Mike Rogers
Member of Congress
MR/pm |
Insanity: Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.
How many times have we tried lobbying against the powers that be to reform laws? Multiple times. Each time is blocked by congress or the president because they are all bought and paid for.
The worst way to change a system is by using the system. The easiest way is to change the firmware directly. Too bad we live in a land of scared people who will only protest. Which protesting labels you as a terrorist. So if it ever does get bad enough they will just start incarcerating the new 'terrorists'.
Patriot Act and FISA need to go but our government, the people we elected are fighting their hardest to maintain it.
Why? Because it is the only defense they have against "We the People". If they can eliminate all the leaders of any uprising, effectively they can prevent an overthrow. Therefore maintaining the status quo and keeping the land under their control. While over 80% of the united states in un-happy with the current situation, they will complain but in the end do nothing.
In 1776 the U.S. established its liberty by going to war over 2% increase in taxes. The situation changed and constitution was written.
Now, war is not the answer to create peace. But it would be a direct change that the government could not deny. This fantasy world we live in, where we believe it possible to change the world through peace does not exist. They tried this back in the 1960s-1970s. All that happened is we stopped fighting a pointless war. Something to placate the masses and stop their uprising.
Here we are today, same problem we had 40-50 years ago, just this time the technology is better making it easier to control. What is it going to take before people start realizing this is a no-win situation?
They already have taken away your right to privacy.
They have ostracized and demonized owning weaponry.
The police force uses no-knock warrants, then shoots you if you try to defend your home and charges you with assault of a police officer.
Illegal search and seizures are increasing.
The police are being armed with hand-me down assault vehicles from the military.
The amount of corruption is reaching a 1/4 to 1/3 of all government agencies. (See TSA, police, and government corruption.)
The very people warning you about this reality are being showboated on television, even though the law protects them. (PFC Bradly Manning) (Snowden)
Laws are being removed from government websites and they keep doing shrugs.
Almost every politician is a liar.
Your government has been lying to you for years. They have been doing whatever they want. (Overthrowing governments, putting dictators in power, illegal research on civilians)
There is reason the world hates US. Time for you all to wake up and realize that your negligence is the reason our country is like this.
EDIT: |
Exactly, I'm Norwegian and I bet the same thing is happening here with close ties to NSA. AFAIK we are even in closer relations to the US than Germany.
I'm shocked by the lack of action, no one has said anything about this publicly, and the newspapers barely report anything about the case.
The articles aren't even on the front page, and it's mostly old articles that can be found if I look for them...
Basically they're avoiding to inform the public |
No, you just want to be contrary. Solar power is not a viable option, and probably (although this part is an opinion) will never be one.
A few semesters ago in my friends senior design class for his mechanical engineering degree, someone wanted to do their year long design project with solar power. It's not like he's a dumb guy either, not the smartest guy I know, but not stupid.
Normally the professor would veto an idea like that (and I think he has) but maybe he was just letting someone do it to prove a point.
At the end of that year long process my buddy swore off ever doing anything with solar power and after following all of the research and math he did (I'm doing the same class soon - wanted to know about the process) I completely see why. |
This is probably the most ignorant statement I have heard on this thread today, which is full of ignorant statements on the law.
There is no lying that occurred. They are allowed to gather all the data they have under PRISM legally. This is due to some intricacies in privacy law. One such is that 100% of your cell calls and e-mails are sent to a third party, which instantly waives your right to privacy. If you didn't know that, and are affronted by the idea, too bad . It's the law. Ignorance is not a defense .
Perjury implies lying under oath to a court of law, where you have sworn to say the truth. Not only has no lie been detected, but it's pretty damn hard to catch them on perjury if they aren't under oath at the senate.
Finally, PRISM is legal even without a third party as the judicial precedent is: cell-phone and e-mail metadata are Not protected forms of speech under the 4th amendment . For years judges have been pointing to the legislature, reminding them that if they want it changed, congress has to do something. |
The problem here, ignoring the hysterics, lies, and semantics, is that we pretty much have an accountable secret court overseeing all of this. The government didn't know how to appoint these guys or care, so they got the chief justice to do it because having Congress to do it is potentially democratic and doing it via the chief justice is perfectly dictatorial. He just appoints rabid pro-military pro-intelligence Republicans and washes his hands of it. I think there has been only one Democratic judge in FISA. That right there is an abuse and shows you how seriously this government takes the massive powers given FISA.
On top of it, they can't be bothered to give redacted summaries of their cases. In fact, the whole court is secret from top to bottom. What exactly is going on here? Instead of Obama or, Bush previously, saying 'yes' to everything, they got some flunkies to do it for them. Its a rubber stamp court that I'm not even sure is constitutional.
Lastly, there's gag orders on corporations forced into compliance. Steve Ballmer not only can't say no to the NSA he can't even tell you what he was trying to say 'no' to. Well, he can, but he'd be immediatly arrested over dozens of felonies, most of which have life sentences. |
You're definitely correct about that. It's obvious as can be. Especially considering which my wife agrees with me on this, that's the excuse used for every infringement of our freedom so far. It's literally the same thing they say every time. |
You're trolling - hoping for all the "don't use tor for torrents" rants.
But I think you might be on to something.
If tor started encouraging both
using tor for torrents, and
contributing enough bandwidth back to make up for your downloads
it would serve the goals of
making tor far more popular (because lots of people pirate movies)
making tor far harder to take down (because lots more people contribute bandwidth), and
making tor far harder to spy on (because more of the content will be boring noise)
increase the costs of those spying (since they depend on paying to run a critical mass of the exit nodes rather than just using their spare bandwidth)
I think it's a good plan. |
Well, I find it relatively comic book. I mean the NSA is supposed to be THE real deal super secret spy agency, with VIP access to the highest of high tech toys and clearance n' whatnot. I have a really hard time imagining a reason that they would do something so blatant. Even if the suggestion that they are doing it blatantly-on-purpose is true, it still does not make any sense to me. There is nothing tangible to gain from scaring people that are on TOR by openly giving away their presence. I suppose the argument could be made that they are wanting to scare child pornographers and criminals enough to reduce their activity there, but that's a pretty passive way of going about it.... to not target directly, gather the info they need to prosecute in secret, and then spring the trap to take them down. Are they just wanting to warn these people off their criminal behavior, but not really fuck with them in hopes of maybe that working better than arrest and prison time? And if that is the case, does that sound like an organization of evil fucks that are waiting to catch the slightest dirt on random Americans by eavesdropping phone calls and emails? My perspective on this whole thing is a mess because the hub-bub surrounding all of it is a flaming pile of insanity.
But I can think of a bazillion reasons... shit, some people don't even need a reason to do it for their own entertainment. It's a lot easier for me to believe someone other than the NSA placed relatively harmless JavaScript on those pages that send a small amount of info to a known NSA ip address. The first people that come to mind are the decent folks that use TOR for the reasons it was intended, and not for criminal activity. They have a perfectly tangible reason to scare away the criminal element. The ole' "A Few Bad Apples..." cliche. |
Technically, in this case Obama was telling the truth:
>President Obama stated, too, that abuse had not been occurring. “All the stories that have been written, what you're not reading about is the government actually abusing these programs and listening in on people's phone calls or inappropriately reading people's emails,”
We had not been reading about it, even though it had been occurring. While technically true, it is still deceptive. We must parse politician's words carefully. If he had flat out lied about it, I would not have believed him.
Notice also that whenever a politician is asked: "Can the NSA [fill in abuse of surveillance power here]?"
The politician responds "The NSA is not allowed to [commit that type of abuse].
However, the question was not whether they're allowed to, but whether they can , i.e. whether they're able to . |
Different version of say a Mac has different hardware than difference versions of a PC. It's not that different.
Unless off course those Mac's use different processors (RAM, etc.) slots which is the same thing as happens with different models of PC.
Actual mainstream generation changes are much more rare. Changes from DDR2 to DDR3, PCI to AGP to PCI-express, or whatever. |
I deleted (not deactivated) my main facebook account in 2010. 2 months ago I reinstalled Spotify after years of not using it, logged in with my old Spotify account (was linked to my deleted Facebook account) and BAM, mails with "long time no see" and "lots of things happened in Facebook" bullcrap started to clog my inbox. |
where "friends" can whine about trivial things day in and day out
This was why I deleted my Facebook. The handful of useful things I used it for were drowned in a sea of people complaining about homework, posting an exclamatory status about whatever sports game we're all already watching, and having lame inside joke "conversations" on an unrelated person's original post. My few truly long-distance friends that I keep in touch with using Facebook will remain my friends, and I'm glad to be done with all the other bullshit. |
Let's get something straight about the cloud....if they want something gone, POOF, it's gone. If you want something gone, while it may appear gone, there is probably a backup copy of it that you can't access, and is hidden. |
Deleting your account perma-deletes your account's contents (note: photos other people posted that you got tagged in are their photos). I don't have the link but as of last year, I'm pretty sure there was an Irish audit that Facebook had to pass for legal reasons, and they dedicated engineers to making sure their deletion system was complete.
Account deletion is not the same thing as changing privacy settings or soft-deletion. For every person who complains that they can't delete a photo permanently there'd probably be ten people complaining that they did. |
Removing all pictures of your ex after a breakup is insanely hard and emotionally crap.
I had to untag every single image over the years manually, took a few hours and by the end I was crying. |
I'm not a network guy so my terms are probably bad, I have a bland understanding of encryption and networking.
You guys are all missing the fact that he dumped a private key at the end of the power point presentation. If this private key is what is used for WPA or WPA2 then every good encryption for those wireless routers is broken. In other words the password you use to connect to your router is useless, and all your data that you think is encryption can be de-crypted extremely easily.
More than likely it's the WEP private cert, or so I would hope. |
Usually with rebranding comes a big revamp of the software. On top of that I'd expect in the next few years for Intel to integrate it into their chips in some fashion, even if it's just a dedicated core like they do with AES kind of. |
The title is (and almost always is) the |
They ARE actively recruiting people from other companies. They (the biggest companies who can afford to pay more) are agreeing not to compete amongst themselves when cold calling other companies employees to keep costs low and profit margins higher (welcome to Cartel 101). This is illegal in the US.
You are describing different scenario and saying that is not what is going on (you are correct, they are not being sued for something completely different). But that is unrelated to the illegal activities that are going on now, and that this article is discussing. Committing a major crime is not ok just because they didn't also commit a different major crime.
EDIT: |
Except it is an investment because you are paying money, along with many others, in the hopes that it will culminate into something worth more than what you paid. Or at the very least break even.
Posted this higher but...if I pay 60 dollars to kickstart a board game. I receive the board. It's AWESOME. I would have paid 100 dollars for it. From a personal subjective standpoint I have made a successful investment. To me it was a monetary gain because the product ended up being worth more to me than I paid for it.
It's the same idea as buying stocks. You are investing in a company in hopes that it will do better and you make money. In this case you are just taking your payment in form of a product. From there it is going to be a subjective decision on whether or not your investment panned out for you.
I will however say that not all kickstarters are exactly like this. Some you are putting money down on the hopes that it will help a product come to market which you can then buy. With the idea being that either this product would never come to market with out the help of yourself and others like you, and thus you would never get the chance to buy it otherwise. This is far more of a gamble, a very risky investment. The return on investment assuming that the end product is worth more to you than the combined initial funding and however much you pay at the end.
stocks: you give them money, they give you stocks, you sell stocks, you wait and see if you can sell for the same, more, or less money.
Crowdfunding 'investments' : you give them money-> they give you written promise of something you deem of equal or greater value-> You wait and see if the return is as equal to what they promised, greater, or less. Same idea except you aren't selling the promise.
I will ALSO say that often times your initial purchase does appreciate. You put down money for a specific level of funding. Often times, though not always, during the process of raising money more is added onto the initial investment. In terms of a game. I bought x map, x set of figures, x set of dice. Later once more money is put down by others they add in. another map, another set of figures, and metal dice! oh and some cool art to hang your wall.
I put down money for a specific product and now I am getting more for the same amount of money. My investment has appreciated. |
The market wouldn't support Apple's pricing if it weren't backed up by something. I ask again, why do you think Apple can charge what they charge and still succeed in the current device market?
I was trying not to bash Apple directly, but here we go.
Apple did not create the smartphone. The slosest, relevant item to that would be RIMs "BlackBerry". But it sucked major ass - it was slow, buggy, etc, buti twas all there was for a bit. Apple coems along, and drops the "iPhone", this amazing, speedy, responsive, stable, and virtually buggless (in comparison) device, which took the world by storm. Everyone wanted one, and suddenly that Motorola Razor you thought was so cool because it was thin and pretty, was a turd.
They reinvented the smartphone, and you didn't need a toupee and a suit to use one. It had no real competitor, and when you find yourself in a market you own, you charge what you want. Apple did exactly that.
It was good compared to the BB, and at the time was a great device. Then along comes Android, which just a handful of years after it's own birth owns over 75% of the market. People are slowly realizing that 700-1k for an iPhone is kinda silly, when a 400-600 Android does exactly the same things, and some better, and more.
And yes, a MacBook retains value - but not from an actual value standpoint, it's from a market demand standpoint. A 5 year old MacBook is just as shitty as a 5 year old Windows PC (I'll definitely concede the MacBook is probably the better deal once you pass 5 years), but "It's a Mac!" is why it will retain value, not because "it's still good"(c'mon, it's 5 year old tech).
I'll agree Apple does seem to tie their ecosystem together quite well - but at the expense of choice. It is an unnecessary bitch to do things outside of Apples directive (I don't want to have to use BMW approved roads and fuel with my shiny new M3).
I'm not trying, at all, to say Apple products are shit - because that's just short sighted and fucking ignorant of the obvious. They make great products, that have a comparatively low fail rate, and I don't recall the last "ugly" product they released. However, regardless how great their customer support is, they simply charge way too much.
> That's not to say it's not justifiable to buy non-Apple products, though. I'm hardly drunk on Cupertino's special blend of Kool-Aid.
Which is fine, I'm simply trying to say that the "extra mile" Apple may put in isn't worth the extra cash. That's all. I personally hate their stuff, only because it doesn't conform to the things I use, the usage patterns I follow, and my general love of customization and openness.
If I cared less about modifying, tweaking, and generally fucking around with stuff, I would love an iPhone 5 - there is only one phone that comes even close in sheer quality of design and aesthetic appeal. Even then, I cannot bring myself to use iTunes ever again. What the fuck.
> Yeah, you could save $200-$300 and grab a great ASUS laptop with similar specs, but then you'd be missing out on 12 hours of battery life; a beautiful, slim, and lightweight chassis; OSX; a trackpad that actually works; the ability to resell the product several years down the line for well over what you'd get from a PC...
When it comes time to "upgrade" the Mac, I'll be swapping a few slightly outdated components for far cheaper than the whole "out with the old, in with the new" process that comes with a Mac.
You also seem to think that there is something special about Mac software and hardware blend together - if you buy a new PC you get the same experience, you need only not buy that shit cheap $350 Wal-mart laptop that is "Windows Certified". An $800-$900 windows laptop will give you the same fluid, in-tune experience a $1600 MacBook will - and will be useable for just as long. |
Here's what Google is doing:
Let Comcast somewhat think they are trying to become an ISP by feigning at first and then suggesting they might actually go through with it.
Comcast will assume this is a double-feint goading into providing better service and being more "competitive" so Google can push more and more products and services through the increased bandwidth. Comcast thinks Google Fiber is really a paper tiger.
Google actually goes through with it. Google would never have gotten such a large jump on the big ISPs without point #1 & 2. If Google showed true, serious intent, even companies like Comcast would actually become more competitive so they wouldn't die. Instead, they remain uncompetitive while Google rolls out fucking fiber .
Profit |
Google's business model is deviously brilliant. Give consumers quality services. They don't pay money for these services, so let's call them "free". However, we collect their browsing data, sell that to advertisers who cater ads to them, and make our money that way.
At least that's how I understand it. I don't mind the browsing data collection to be honest so long as it's only going to advertisers who then pay Google so I don't have to. The problem with that is, we can't control exactly who sees that data, so privacy becomes a concern. I got too into this comment, but |
I bet it is informative. I just don't like the way the title is presented. It's reminiscent of yellow newspapers.
edit: Thanks for the |
Since the reddit link's title was about as helpful as a tumor, here are excerpts that help paint the pretty picture presented in the article:
AT&T Inc. has many strong rivals in the great convergence of wireless, Internet and video technologies, but none looms larger — potentially — than search giant Google.
Again and again over nearly 350 pages of executive declarations and transaction summaries, attention focuses on the potential competitive threat of Google.
Google Fiber is “the most ambitious and potentially disruptive” broadband provider, the filing states.
In her declaration, AT&T senior executive vice president Lori Lee said Google’s deployment of fiber in Kansas City has been “very successful.” She said AT&T has lost customers in Google areas since the search company launched its service there last year.
U-verse is the fastest growing part of AT&T’s business.
The filing also cites experts who predict that Google could capture at least half of the households in its Kansas City “fiberhoods” in three to four years.
...[I]t points out that 24 of the 34 cities that Google has targeted for expansion are within AT&T’s “U-verse footprint.”
Google could profitably build a network passing 20 or 30 million U.S. homes and business over the next several years, the report said. |
Sadly many people do. I went on my friends dropbox to download a file and he had a plaintext document which contained his bank logins and all CC numbers. |
No, I don't think Facebook is looking for any other way of making money, because it is easy to sell ad spots. Do you think major television networks are trying to find a better way around commercials? Of course not, even though Netflix and other streaming providers are quickly picking up the slack. Not to mention, companies such as Netflix are starting to envelope the overall market. Now, with TV, you pay a company to deliver channels to you, just like paying an isp to deliver the Internet to you. You get the channels/webpages, and all are paid by the ads and services they provide. So, if they can successfully pull this off, they really are doing something revolutionary. Sure the product is essentially the same, but this is how things evolve. Pieces changing ever so slightly, until something has a sizeable advantage over previous versions. |
Le Rich Space Man is singlehandedly going to lead earth into an electric revolution shortly before establishing the first colony on mars and developing the first F |
I moved from Dallas area to a small town in Kentucky on the 15th. I left Verizon Fios that had a few competitors in the area for Time Warner that has little competition here. I hooked up my cable boxes and was immediately transported back 20 years by the GUI. The last time I saw a guide like that was when I first got cable after high school, the early 90's.
When I got home one of the HD boxes has no HDMI out, and had to resort to using component cables, one of the plugs from the box is broken, the red one, so the picture is pink. I cannot get whole house DVR in this county, which floored me.
There are very few HD channels even with the highest tier cable TV package. For example, I have one HD HBO as opposed to 7 or 8 with FIOS, Comedy Central has no HD, news channels either. The channel line up is scattered all over the place. The sports channels are scattered between the news channels and Disney.
Another thing is I have no control over HD output. There's no way to adjust the picture, so my TV goes from full screen to stretched to black bars on top and the sides.
I have had them since the 18th of december and have Dish coming to hook me up today. I have no other option for internet, but I will not suffer through shitty cable. |
Soooo... I work for Time Warner Cable. I can say I bust my ass to keep the plant running smoothly... Talking 100-150 hours a 2 week paycheck on average but usually every pay period... We have one of the 'newer' plants in the division and it is 20 years old.... Coax cable is expensive and fiber is even more expensive. With the amount of plant across the company to go to an all fiber upgrade, like tomorrow, would bankrupt the company or really rape your bills.... In addition to the communication manufactures can't really keep up with the amount of Fiber Optic Cable being ordered across the industry.
But to put in perspective of how hard it is to please everyone... I work a very small area (around 14,000 people) roughly 500 miles of plant and I have 17,000 pieces of equipment (cable boxes, modems and phone modems) active to my 'area'. That is nothing at all in comparison to a NYC or LA system....
For those who don't realize the dumbest stuff can knock your service off.... People move stuff in their homes and throw modems out of spec, people do their own wiring, trucks hit lines, tree companies chainsaw lines, amplifiers die, people growing pot causing modems to go offline (it does happen...), freezing temperatures causes cable to pull out of connectors, cable goes bad, fuses blow, equipment fails, squirrels eat cable, electric lines melt cable, water destroys cable. There are a million reasons why facebook won't connect and you can't play candy crush. Some takes time to find, as intermittent is just that.... Intermittent.
At any given time I have customers complaining about how Time Warner Cable sucks in my 'area', how their stuff never works.... They complain to a friend and that friend then thinks about how facebook didn't connect that one time 2 months ago and then they complain about how Time Warner is terrible... Lol most of the time there isn't any legitimate problem at their homes, they just remember times when stuff didn't work and say it's all the time. This is the life of a cable guy. But most customers are generally ok with their service, and some are actually quite happy with it. You rarely hear the ok and pleased because, there is nothing to bitch about so they find something else to bitch about.
Time Warner is slowly progressing out of the old school thought of 'fuck the customers and impress the investors'. As far as the actual service goes behind the scenes they are making alot of huge improvements toward not being douchebags.... It all takes time to upgrade.... Example, the Maxx program seems to be pretty cool.
As far as Customer Service goes, I can't speak on... I know they actively are trying to get better....
Just my rant.... Yes Time Warner Cable has some shitty things go on.... Any company with millions and millions of customers will... Think how many times McDonalds (or equivalent) has messed up your orders in your life... But there are employees who give a shit and actively try to NOT let it suck....
Oh, and I know your bill goes up.... I turn a wrench, I wish I could fix your bill but I can't. I'd love to get everyone a month of free service once a year, or the longer you stay the bigger discount you get, but I can't... Stop yelling at me about it. Lol |
Tell your Uncle it's about ensuring a free market for internet services and that it removes government from allowing controls that destroy small businesses. |
I'm sure you may already realize this, but the burden of proof lies on them. They have to give evidence that taxes will raise - not pretend people like you, thinking critically, have to disprove their random claims. The problem is that there's no proof for them to give, only speculation.
Still, there are people to like to debunk random exaggerated lies, so you can just read up articles like this:
Any possible truth in the statement assumes a worst case scenario, which will not happen. It is still possible taxes will increase, and it's also possible they will not increase at all, or that they'll decrease.
So |
How would that be suspicious? You mean time passed, then something went wrong? That seems to be how things work. We both respect eachother enough to realize what's a fault and what isn't.
For example, I had him replace the fusebox on my motorcycle once. A week later, while driving home, it broke down. Clearly an electrical problem. Did I call him and yell at him? No. I did call him and ask for advice, though, because I was freaking stranded. We worked out it was a charging problem, and he was apologetic about it when it wasn't even anything he touched. It wasn't his fault, it was just a crazy coincidence.
Same story- I was stranded halfway between Portland and Seattle. I called my mom to see what she thought I should do. It was Sunday so shops are closed and I really didn't know what to do. So she came and picked me and my bike up with my brother's truck. She spent 4 hours (round trip) driving to help me out, not to mention struggling to help me load the thing. Like I said before, mom is ALWAYS ahead.
We all know that we can depend on one another, so I really don't have any problems spending a few hours fixing their computers. |
I noticed the same thing when i was in college, where was in charge of arranging various social events. Initially, I would just allow people to sign-up and then arrange according to how many signed-up. I would never get even close to the number who signed-up actually turning-up. This wasted money and time.
Then I instituted a policy that you had to pay $1 to sign-up. Worked a treat! At least 75% of people who signed-up would actually turn-up. |
I can see your point, but it's not exactly a straightforward equation. Suppose you convince half the people who currently pay these prices for eBooks that they shouldn't do so (for this example, it doesn't matter if they pirate it, buy a physical copy, or don't buy the book at all, as long as they don't buy the digital copy).
Publishers will notice this, but what conclusion will they reach?
"eBook sales are down, we should lower the price to drive up sales" (your proposed reaction)
"eBook sales are down, it must have been a fad, let's cut back on the number of titles we're producing into eBooks. (Also, this allows us to justify the continuation of the infrastructure we've built up to print physical books over several generations, hurray!)"
"eBook sales are down, but we have a core audience that continuously buys eBooks, we should raise the price to maintain our profit levels" (not likely, but if you're blaming the people who buy the books at these already inflated prices, it's possible that they would continue to do so at higher prices)
"eBook sales are down, people must be pirating eBooks, let's revamp our DRM to cut back on piracy!"
The thing is, most of these companies aren't dependent on the digital version, so they don't need to "meet the market price." In fact, many of them are probably actively trying to keep physical book printing an attractive option, since their entire industry has been built upon it for, well, ever.
Book companies won't let them charge $2-4 a book, they're (justifiably) terrified that it will make their business model obsolete. The current eBook scheme is a bridge between the old way of doing things and the new way... the price, the DRM, the limited availability of titles (and delayed release of new releases) were all a necessary evil to get book publishers to get on board with this new way of doing things.
I'm not saying the price is fair. I'm not saying that the price will magically get lower when they rework their business model around this brave new world... but it had to be this way in order to get meaningful publisher support. I realize that there is a risk in allowing these inflated eBook prices to solidify as the "standard price" since it will shape people's perception of what this emerging market "should" charge, but the alternative was to have a much smaller selection of available titles. |
Of course Google are completely within their rights to delete whatever they want from their servers, but I don't feel wrong in my sense of entitlement. Our collective use of Google's servers have, in a very short, space of time made them amongst the wealthiest and most profitable companies in the world.
Internet advertising is a funny business model. I use their services and allow them to advertise to me with the understanding that they will then spend a portion of their revenue improving their services. I can make these demands because there's no shortage of alternative available. Obviously I'm being a little facetious by speaking in a personal capacity but it's only to elucidate the point. |
The problem is that the caps might not be a big deal now, but they will be in the very near future. 250 GB might be more than enough for most households under the current order of things, but as technology marches forward that will start to seem insignificant. Think about how much bandwidth per month the average person used five years ago. 2 to 5 gigabytes, probably. Now its not uncommon to do that on your PHONE. The future is with streaming and cloud services but data caps stand contrary to that. |
Hardly.
For a start, they fail the definition because Apple is at least using the technologies patented here.
But really, this is just the way any organisation must conduct business in the US. The system is a total SNAFU and playing "nice" will just see you get screwed over eventually because basically every non-trivial piece of software will be infringing a patent or 12. There's no pointing arguing over the fairness of play when it's the rules that are broken. |
Is SSD a viable alternative these days?
[Tom's Hardware on that.]( |
This blog post is well informed but goes off on some dead end road once it hits the editorializing part. Apple has good industrial designers. They don't do the sort of R&D that HP used to do. Apple makes pretty consumer products. HP does/did this too but that wasn't what their engineers were all working on.
Engineering, not just product design, is a cost center in a company's structure. As such, it is always on the list of things to squeeze to reduce costs. The customers for engineering departments are generally internal. This means that from a business perspective they cost money and don't bring any money in. That they develop the products that are being sold doesn't factor into the accounting books. If I generate a deliverable that means the company gets a million dollars it isn't counted towards engineering, it goes towards sales or the project management group.
That companies that are producing products based on standardized, common technology are slashing engineering departments isn't really surprising. There isn't much engineering going on and what little there is can be done by just about any engineer anywhere in the world.
High tech companies that are producing specialty products and engineering the latest and greatest are still thriving or at least hanging on. |
That's up in millimeter wave band. Radio waves are measured in meters, the length between 2 points in the upper or lower phase traveling at (near) the speed of light. For example, FM radio broadcasts around 100MHz that you listen to in your car are in the 3 meter radio band. Radio waves attach to things (Antennas!) that are their same size, for the most part. This is why you get such interference and short distance out of wifi (2.4GHz = 1.2cm). So ignoring the fact that THz is way outside the radio spectrum (about 3kHz to 300GHz...its actually closer to infrared) this means that they will stop travelling every time they hit a piece of metal about a millimeter or smaller (specifically 1/10th of a mm). Think of all the small metal solders and pins inside all your electronics. Just my 2 cents. |
The higher the frequency the more susceptible it is to physical interference. Essentially a thz range frequency could be blocked by a poorly placed tree branch. |
Directly comparing it to the energy used to transmit on current wireless frequencies would lead to a wrong conclusion.
Assuming we are talking about standard cellular networks, most of the energy is used to try to increase signal penetration and strength in places without direct line of sight.
When dealing with the THz Frequencies, it would take an enormous amount of power to transmit into almost any house without line of sight.
Light exists within the THz Frequencies, if you shine a flashlight through a wall, you won't see it on the other side, even if you hooked up a massive power source to it. |
Apple attemtps to stifle the competition may be a two edged sword.
My minimalist ancient cell phone (who needs a fancy display for a phone?) and ancient info minimalist PocketPC both bit the dust recently. So i thought i'd check the fancy new fangled gadgets.
It appears the pocketable info/phone world is split into Apple and Android. Android is a confusion of choice. So Apple comes to fore immediately, because they're a clear identifiable name for anyone who doesn't have a clue what's going on (myself). But, after a quick check, i decided i don't like their attitude of absolute control.
Which meant i should hunt around for an android device. But, for android devices, it's a jungle out there. Hard to choose. However, it quickly became apparent that Apple is deathly afraid of Samsung. And there's a huge amout of stuff all over the place about Apple battling Samsung. So, i took that as a kind of sign that Samsung were the best of Android. (That may or may not be true, but there must be at least some degree of truth in that - why else would Apple bother?) I checked them out and settled on a Samsung Galaxy Note - a beautiful device that exceeds my expectations.
So, thank you Apple, for pointing the way to Samsung. |
Still irrelevant. If we moved labor to the U.S we'd have more jobs. But it's all about the money and abusing child labor in foreign countries. And, still, irrelevant. Point is we don't need military tech, military anything. We shouldn't have to kill each other for any reason. There is not one justifiable reason to apply force to someone else and that is what the military promotes, force and violence. It's not there to defend, it's not there to protect us citizens. It's there to threaten with force and death those who oppose the ones in control. |
There's so much misinformation & misunderstanding & mis-stated facts in this article,.. I don't even know where to begin,... (but I'll try)
> "Mike Trang likes to use his iPhone 4 as a GPS device, helping him get around in his job. Now and then, his younger cousins get ahold of it, and play some YouTube videos and games."
But then further down in the article he says:
> "Really, I'm just looking at pictures and text once in a while."
Obviously this guy has no genuine idea of how much data he's using. (is he aware that Location Services uses data?... is he aware that Apps like GPS use data ?... )
> "He pays $30 per month for "unlimited" data."
Not sure how this is possible since a plan like that doesnt even exist.(it might be "unlimited CALLING".. but it's certainly not "unlimited DATA").
Also.. why isn't he using WIFI ?... I understand mobile services like GPS he may not be in range of WiFi... but seriously?... Youtube videos or other things should be done over WiFi |
Not sure how this is possible since a plan like that doesnt even exist.(it might be "unlimited CALLING".. but it's certainly not "unlimited DATA").
It most certainly does exist. They don't offer it to new customers anymore, but anyone who had that plan when they stopped offering it to new customers was able to keep it.
> |
Sure, imagine we are in the graphics mode with 4 colors and we want to animate a row of green dots moving left to right across the screen with a black background.
First we set up our color palette for the 4 colors and the background. Based on the [Atari memory map]( the color settings start at memory location 708. So we set the first pixel color to green and all the other colors to black including the background, something like this in BASIC...
POKE 708, 192 (green in color register 0)
POKE 709, 0 (black in color register 1)
POKE 710, 0 (black in color register 2)
POKE 712, 0 (black in color register 3)
POKE 713, 0 (black in color register 4 for the background)
Next we set our graphics mode and draw the image with the dots we want to animate. The color of the pixels will alternate starting with color 0, ending with color 3 and then starting at 0 again. The pixels on the screen will be something like the following...
[color 0][color 1][color 2][color 3][color 0][color 1][color 2][color 3][color 0]...
So you have this row of pixels made up of all four of the possible colors in the palette. But we set the color register for colors 1, 2, and 3 to match the background so you actually wont notice these pixels on the screen because they are the same color as the background. So instead of seeing something like this...
0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3...
You will see...
0...0...0...0...
Now to animate all these pixels on the screen we don't need to change the pixels themselves, instead we will adjust the color registers to create the animation effect. Recall that we set the first color register to 192 and all other color registers to 0. We will now set the first color register to 0 and the next to 192. Something like this...
POKE 708, 0 (black in color register 0)
POKE 709, 192 (green in color register 1)
Since color 0 is now the same as the background you no longer notice these pixels, but color 1 is now green so these pixels will stand out from the background and now you see something like this...
.1...1...1...1...1...
We again shift the color green in the color registers...
POKE 709, 0 (black in color register 0)
POKE 710, 192 (green in color register 1)
And now we get...
..2...2...2...2...
This cycling of the color green through the palette makes different pixels stand out from the background and creates the illusion of animation because you only see the pixels that are a different color from the background. |
After reading very briefly through the post and the comments on this thread, I think that we, the members of Reddit, should institute a policy of harsh skepticism for cases like this. The post on the site seemed to contain a variety of words and phrases to indicate that it is an urgent issue that must be addressed immediately. This would prevent us from doing the proper background research necessary to make a fair and informed decision. Even some of the threads on here(Thethoughtful1, metjazz) seem to contradict what the OP is saying. I remain skeptical of the claims of the OP and look forward to more detailed information before making a decision. We, the members of Reddit, have a great deal of power in numbers and rash decisions have come back to haunt us in the past. |
Everything I know about VC I learned from The Darkest Hour. |
Highjacking the top comment to say it appears WhosHere was around first. A Google search shows Who's Here was around before [August 2008]( They have had a Wikipedia article since [September 29, 2008]( Ignoring the author's own claim that Who's Near Me was founded only two years ago, another Google search shows that his Who's Near Me app doesn't show up in results before [June 2010]( |
This really doesn't bother me very much. Blueprints are only a portion of the information needed to build a building, or a piece of machinery. The specification is the other piece of that puzzle, calling out what tensile strength steel is needed in that building for the roof joists, for instance. Sometimes this information can be found in the prints, sometimes it can only be found in the specification.
Stealing someone else's prints also won't help the Chinese espionage agents become better designers, just as copying someone's homework in high school didn't help that person learn anything. Even if they had three different revision levels of prints, and found the changes made from oldest to newest, they wouldn't know why the changes had been made. They wouldn't have done the R&D to fully understand and implement those changes. |
This is actually a really dangerous problem. Chineese knockoffs are showing up as load bearing or pressure bearing structures made from incorrectly specified steel. Engineers everywhere design things to these standard specs, so when an inferior steel is used we start having problems we thought we had solved 100 years ago. |
This is essentially a shallow clone of Facebook's domain model, with very minor changes, such as hashtags support for posts. Apart from this it doesn't integrate with Facebook in any way (it handles its own authentication, has its own set of user accounts, and you 'follow' people on App.net, seperately to friend lists). As a developer, this is fuck-useless to me; Facebook's offering to me is a good-enough API, and a social network packed with people and their pre-existing relationships, many of them 7-day active. (I know the article mentions they are built on the facebook platform, but the API doesn't look anything like this).
If I publish an in-app event on Facebook, it gets viewed by many people. On App.net, essentially nobody will see it. From my perspective I may as well integrate with Twitter - I can leverage their OAuth for authentication and publish shit to someones feed that can be seen by other potential users.
I don't think that App.net can fix this. If they try to integrate with Facebook in a closer way, they will just end up being another Open Social.
The offer Facebook is making is "fuck off" money. I'm pretty surprised that they have made the offer really, I'd pick them to have pretty close to a 1 in 100 chance of being a success. I imagine that he has a much more rosy picture of his chances, and as such overvalues his idea. Facebook probably offered him under a million, he feels insulted, and wants to go it alone. He is now trying to stir up controversy to get money for his kickstarter-like thing on his website - and 500k isn't going to buy him enough users to be competitive. |
I don't know enough to say with certainty that they could never exist naturally. Hopefully none of what I'm going to say sounds condescending. I just want to explain as much as I think will be necessary.
Hydrogen formed after the big bang as the universe cooled. Elements from helium, 2, to iron, 26, are made by fusion within stars. Every naturally occurring element after iron is made by fusion during supernovae. Heavier elements, elements with higher atomic numbers, are less stable. They basically cast off particles and become a lighter element. The elements that we synthesize have very short half lives, the time in which half of a sample of that element will decay. Take for example Americium. It has a half life of 432.2 years. If a few atoms of it were made by a supernova they would all be decayed into Neptunium and then probably Uranium by now. Other elements are even less stable lets say an sample of Ununoctium had been created in a supernova. It would only have had a half life .89 ms. That's .00089 seconds. There's no way a sample would have survive to the present.
It may be possible to prove weather or not this happens. Supernovae are happening all around us in the universe. A spectroscopic image of one might reveal the presence or absence of elements heavier than 94. But I don't know if this has been done. |
I switched from AT&T several months ago to T-Mobile with my iPhone 4s. After studying my usage I found it even cheaper to just use it as a "pay as you go phone" and get a Mobile Hotspot with the unlimited data for $40 a month. Then use the 4G to talk and text via Apps.
T-mobile: Total I am averaging <$45 a month with unlimited Data on my iPhone, iPads, and all my other mobile devices.
vs.
AT&T: $90 per month with the lowest everything and no unlimited data + $20 a month if I want data on one iPad... |
I'm a big T-Mobile fan, and was very upset when I had to switch to ATT back in '08 for work. Four years later, the second our contract was up, we went back to T-Mo. My wife brought her iPhone 4, and I switched to a Galaxy Nexus. Our experience with data hasn't been ideal, and it just seems they are not ready to support the iPhones in smaller metro areas yet. She's still on Edge because they haven't made the frequency switch on the local towers yet. We've only been back for 2 months now, and I'm sure it will get better but be sure to do your homework first. I will say, the huge advantage is that if you're not getting a subsidized phone, you can save a ton of cash on a plan. We went from $160/mo on ATT to about $90 with T-Mo. |
My iPhone / T-Mobile strategy is a bit complex and certainly not for everybody, but it's pretty damn economical. I've dubbed it my 'roaming landline system'. When in wifi range (which is quite often), I'm using my old AT&T number which has been ported to google voice. Free google voice calls/texts (through the app Talkatone) plus wifi data, this is how I do the bulk of my iPhone communicating. I've also put in a T-Mobile paygo sim card, which is a different number for shorter phone calls that I only really give out to the handful of people who might need to get immediate hold of me while I'm out on the go/outside of wifi range. I've given up paying for data, but as a former mobile data addict, it's been refreshing to reclaim my data-fried brain and to realize that I can absolutely navigate and thrive in my city without the need for constant connection. I don't need to check for notifications and various feeds when I'm out to lunch alone or with people, I'm feeling much more present without the lingering urge to check for minor updates. I purchased 1000 minutes for $100, which is probably more than I need for a year with this system, but I didn't want to be fretting too much about minutes expiring, refilling, etc. |
I went to a TMo store this morning and while they're offering something that might work, it's nothing like what you describe. It's $59.99 and it's "faux" unlimited - up to a speed capped amount of 4G WiMAX, not includin the hotspot (another $130) which you have to buy, keep charged and carry around. This of course is with no phone service and/or shitty EDGE if you forget to bring the hotspot.
As someone coming from that $90 price point, it might still make sense for me to change, but Virgin or Cricket seem to offer the better experience for iPhone customers and even them im not sure (Verizon LTE speeds are beastly and included hotspot on the newest iPad is hard to beat) |
Funny story. I was getting some coffee one day at my local coffee spot and a couple of T-Mobile reps were there and asked, "Want some free coffee?"
"What's the catch?" I ask.
"No catch! It's part of a promotion we're doing. They (corporate) gave us money to drum up new business so we pre-bought $100 worth of coffee."
OK, I think, I'm in no hurry so the least I can do is be civil to them. They ask me who my data carrier is. I tell them: "Sprint." They ask me why? "Two words: Unlimited data. "
"Well, we have a battery swap program. You can bring your phone in and we'll swap in a brand new charged-up battery for free!" they tell me.
"Unlimited data."
"Well, OK," they continue, "but with T-Mobile you get five gigs of data every month. Even if you stream music I bet you still don't use nearly as much data, do you?"
"I don't know," I reply. "I don't have to know, because it's unlimited. "
They look at the next person in line. "Hey, how'd you like some free coffee?" |
I'm guessing for the upcoming OS renditions like windows 8, which I think has a similar structure on your PC and your tablet, windows phone.
I think it's pretty cool, and there's a lot of things you can do with 'phone' apps in general. If you own a consulting company, you can put this on a server computer (so you can control the network/have everything updated equally), put a bunch of technical documents and specific apps on it, then provide small tablets for your workforce to make their job easier/faster/more efficient. |
The number of cores is really irrelevant. What matters is how many total operations per second a chip can perform.
Chip performance can be measured in Instructions per Second, usually in million (MIPS) or in computational power in Floating Point Operations per Second (FLOPS).
Within an architecture, it's easy to compare, say between AMD and Intel because both are x86. Between instruction sets of two different chips, FLOPS is the only useful comparison, but that may not be meaningful because a certain chip's instruction set may be more efficient for what you are doing than another. |
Any Android developer using the NDK worth half his salt would just compile binaries for x86 as well as ARM. It's literally as easy as adding "x86" to one line (APP_ABI := armeabi armeabi-v7a x86) in one makefile. If you're using some ARM-specific instructions in your native app, then there may be an issue (though not really - creating a C fallback for the ARM assembly and compiling that separately for other architectures should be easy for you if you already have a meaningful amount of ARM assembly written). Pure C/C++ NDK apps should "just work" with the change to APP_ABI. |
That's actually the reason for three- and four-engined jets like the 747 or the 727 they crash in this video. The remaining engines don't have to work as hard if one fails or the aircraft can absorb multiple failures and still be OK. Given reliability and efficiency developments since the 1980s, twin-engine aircraft are certified to fly over water for extended periods of time.
Aircraft (especially twin-engine aircraft) are rated for the amount of time they can fly away from an emergency diversion point. This ranges from anywhere between the 1950s standard of 60 minutes to modern design capacities (340 minutes for the Boeing 787). The modern regulatory standard is 180 minutes, which makes something like 90% of the surface of the earth effectively safe to fly for the purpose of "engine broke, wat do" situations. |
Fucking please .
Ubuntu has somwhere around 20 mil users total
Windows 8 sold over 4 million upgrade copies in 4 days. That's not counting full copies sold. |
Growing in size is not (in an of itself) evidence of a memory leak-- it may be indication of inefficient memory usage, but there are many cases where memory management (e.g. .NET/Java/python/Javascript engines, etc) will allow growth for performance and only perform memory garbage collection when it is performant (or necessary) to do so. (Here's even a little write-up
If you are seeking performance gains and your machine is otherwise not starving other resources, you want to use as much memory as necessary without impacting performance for other processes.
In modern day applications it's very difficult to tell the difference between excellent memory optimization and memory leaks. Because if you are perfectly performing, you won't slow down to free up memory when it's not necessary yet to do so and thus memory usage may grow to fill available space. A badly written program may not free up memory ever which would be a true memory leak. |
Supergalacticcaptain, Waterfox has almost nothing to do with this problem. Just to be clear, Waterfox is not an independent fork of Firefox, it is just another version of firefox built differently. They do not have the development resources that Mozilla has and cannot be fixing all of Mozilla's 64-bit bugs. |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.