Datasets:

jkruk
/

tech-data

Dataset card Data Studio Files Files and versions Community

Split (1)

train · 13.7k rows

0 stringlengths 9 22.1k
I'd argue that a social network like Facebook actually functions much better in the confines of a larger institution (like a university) than in a total vacuum. When everybody on your networking page is at your college, or even just in any college, you immediately have a number of meaningful connections. You're probably about the same age, have at least temporarily similar interests and activities. Most importantly, you actually have a fair change of actually interacting with the person that you socially network with. It makes a lot more sense to have facebook being used for "here's pictures of our awesome party last week, also is anybody going to that Bob Law Blob dissertation later man I hate finals don't you? go MASCOTS!" than it does when you're sharing your family photos with somebody who knows that guy who used to date your ex-lover's sister and is therefore now your close and trusted buddy. It's precisely the fact that most "Friends Lists" are actually filled with strangers that makes it look like attention whoring.
It doesn't entirely convinces me. It is written by someone who's probably deep into it digital world, probably posting data on a daily basis on various outlets, and assume that everyone else is too. From the opening line, there's a bias to make digital right at any cost, so the problem space seems too restricted (to me). > To obsess over the offline and deny all the ways we routinely remain disconnected is to fetishise this disconnection. And an alcoholic who fetishises being sober is a bad thing. But how much drinking is too much drinking? The author avoids that question like the plague. > But this idea that we are trading the offline for the online, though it dominates how we think of the digital and the physical, is myopic. It fails to capture the plain fact that our lived reality is the result of the constant interpenetration of the online and offline. I disagree with this oversimplistic reduction. It's true on a physical level, but at this rate everything that we do in life: play, work, love, hate would be equivalent. They're not. It's permitted to segregate real life into defined areas in order to reason. When you're in front of a networked screen, you're online , and spending time that would otherwise be spent not online . > It is the fetish objects of the offline and the disconnected that are not real. I get the point, but it's also a borderline schizophrenic refusal to dissociate his whole existence from an arguably non-essential activity. > Not too long ago, people walked with their heads up, looking at the water, the sky, the sand and at one another, talking. Now they often walk with their heads down, typing. Again, this was never resolved. Is that a loss or not? You would think that it is a trade-off - we skip a few enjoyable moments of traditional offline mode to spend enjoyable moments in the "augmented reality". Many gamers would agree: time wasted enjoying yourself is not time wasted. What does the author love so much about twitter and facebook? > It is wrong to say “IRL” to mean offline: Facebook is real life. Facebook doesn’t curtail the offline but depends on it. [...] it is the fuel that runs the engine of social media. Yes, IRL brings the online to life, but what has online connectivity brought to IRL? Other than deep introspections at the grocery store, that is. What are we trading off, if anything, by this new enjoyment of the online?
the HD4000 is barely able to run Skyrim smoothly at 1366x768 with Medium quality, and that on the high end i7 configurations that have higher clock limits on the GPU. The i5 coming with the Surface Pro is not only inferior in the CPU side being that it will be heavily downclocked, but the GPU will also be downclocked in order to keep temps and battery consumption in check. That, and a 1080p screen where lowering the game resolution will make it look all blurry. Btw, don't cite "consoles are able to run X" as an argument, as they have way inferior hardware than an average PC from the last 3 years. Specifically in the case of Skyrim, the console version has lower resolution textures, runs at only 720p and has several quality settings lowered from what is the "max" setting on PC.
L-3 also makes Rifle optics for the US Military, as well as other high level contracting jobs for the US Military. Source - Edit: Level 3 and L-3 are completely separate.
I don't think this is nearly as bad as people are making out. I've been looking for corroboration from infrastructure companies and internet traffic monitors and I don't see any evidence of increased traffic or latency or anything. Netflix has reported no problems. And the number of people moaning on Twitter about Netflix 'not working' is no higher than normal.
This pretty much sums up how kick ass NASA is. They need to have epic music like they have in this video. To anyone who thinks it's a waste of time and money in the face of our current economic state, let me put it plainly to you: One of my favorite lines: "MRI concluded that the $25 billion (1958) spent on civilian space R&D during the 1959-69 period returned $52 billion through 1970 and will continue to stimulate benefits through 1987, for a total gain of $181 billion."
Take solace in the likelihood that most people who do know what they're talking about are simply too busy making things happen to sit around commenting on stories about what's happening.
While providing a superior, legal service is one of the best ways to combat piracy, it only covers those who are willing to pay for the content but don't for miscellaneous reasons (ie DRM, lack of digital distribution, don't want to pay the full price to own the product since they are only planning on using/watching it once, etc.). However, unfortunately that isn't the only reason people pirate content. Some people pirate content just because it allows them to save money by getting content for free, or don't want to support the creators but still want the content, or just can't afford to purchase the content legally. In cases like those, the only option available is to shut off access to the content. Which is impossible. Content producers should ignore those who weren't going to purchase the content to begin with, and focus on those who are willing. Rather than looking at each case of piracy as a sale that would have been made if the content were not available illegally, they need to focus on WHY the purchase wasn't made. Pirates weren't going to purchase the content even if they couldn't pirate it. The best way to combat it is to focus on why they weren't going to purchase it and fix the issue so that they will in the future.
Pirates are effectively customers of w/e site(s) they use for getting content. Instead of bitching and moaning about piracy, go the Steam route: offer a better version of what pirates are getting from their favorite sites. When I pirate these days, its because getting/using the product legally is a pain in the cunt (DRM, shittastic digital services [fuck you GFWL, Origin]) or the price is ridiculous ($60+ in the US for an old game). At some point every pirate is going to say to themselves: "I want game (or app) X, is it faster and easier to shell out a reasonable price for it and get a ~guaranteed -to-work version at 10M/s (also ~guaranteed) or go figure out / get the best pirated version (Razor1911 today?)?" Steam can and should be brought up whenever possible in discussions of digital piracy because, unlike every single other fucking "solution" content providers have tried/suggested, it actually directly attacks/addresses the root causes of piracy itself instead of just the symptoms.
Don't forget the shrink wrap on the DVD/BluRay box, plus those stickers on the sides. Once I cut my finger open trying to get it off.
Therein lies the crux. After trying to give MS every benefit of the doubt, I would say that the price point gives Sony the victory here. Personally I'm still going to buy an xbox just because...fuck I don't even know... The critical thing I think though I that both consoles will be successful so we have to look at the long term success as a business and not as fanboys. I think even if the PS4 out sells the XB1, MS could still come out ahead in this in terms of profit and revenue. It's all a matter of how you look at it.
Here is the basic story of how we helped create Al Qaeda from Hillary Clinton itself]( If that isn't clear, the basic idea is that we armed and aided the growth of Al Qaeda as a means to attack Soviet Union. Soviet Union collapsed, and then Al Qaeda turned against us.... using the same guns that we gave them. In Syria we support the Free Syrian Army. The FSA has been tied to Al Qaeda and that's mainly the reason why US has only been providing non-military aid so far to the Syrian rebels, because they want to avoid the rebels from turning against the US after all this is done. The FSA is still a little better than the Al-Nusra Front, which is an Al Qaeda affliated terrorist group in Syria. However, FSA is constantly losing members to Al-Nusra Front. [Source.](
You can find many threads on this here. But I'll take another whack. Primarily, Bose gear performs badly. I've been a musician over 25 years and Bose gear simply does not sound like the real thing. Measurements and a lot of others tend to agree. Second, Bose uses cheap parts and materials. That radio might have $15-$20 (opening of a bose speaker will reveal paper components) of parts inside. Maybe another $20 for assembly and the box. The rest is all profit. Third, Bose heavily markets itself as the best. Clearly, it is not. You can buy natural-sounding equipment made with better materials for less money. Fourth, Bose has the ability to make quality products and chooses not to. Bose has plenty of capital, engineers, test facilities, manufacturing, everything. If management wanted, Bose could make excellent, high-quality gear. Instead, they make garbage and sell it at the highest possible margin
As far as I understand it, the Higgs is what gives things mass. What happens is, there's this mechanism called the Higgs field which acts like a sort of molasses, slowing certain particles down (giving them mass) while other particles go through without any effect (massless particles). A popular analogy is comparing it to people walking through a crowd. A normal person (massless particle) will move through it without much interaction, and speed through. A celebrity (particle with mass), on the other hand, will have the crowd interact with them, and will be slowed down by the people (or, the field).
Do you realize how many people now use smartphones and have absolutely no clue about the technology and concepts behind them. Yeah it might not be shocking to someone reading /r/technology but to a lot of people it is exactly that. I'm not a fan of Facebook so I run a self hosted WordPress for my family to see pictures of my kids. My mother in law forwarded the site to some friends and extended family of hers. I jokingly mentioned that I knew she forwarded it to xyz. She was blown away that by looking at apache logs and cross referencing the who is db for ISP's I was able to figure out 90% of the people she shared it with.
well, vision and memory are pure chaotic systems that we cannot decode. (The only conditions for decoding is, if we somehow managed to deduce memory storage structure from DNA and post-partum experiences, which is essentially determinism of the world and capability to calculate the future, so ... unlikely) As with all pseudorandom things, we need to observe its responses to things in order to deduce a rule. For instance, one person was fed 2000 images, measures his visual cortex after each one, and deduces how each of the 2000 images are represented in the cortex. Then, any additional random image can be 'regenerated' by reading the cortex, and then doing image manip with the 2000 known images to form a pattern that is similar to the currently seeing image.
I feel like it's unfair to consumers to pay for data if we're talking about net neutrality. Although this is the same thing that I have to do with my isp. So why not let the isp (in my case Cox) let a company like Facebook pay for the data that Cox sends from them to me so that I can access Facebook without having to pay Cox. Part of the reason we pay our isp is so that they can maintain their infrastructure that we use right? AT&T has to do this same thing for their network as well correct? So why not let a company pay for their data that goes through AT&T network to maintain the infrastructure so that consumers don't have to. I don't understand why this is a problem. If it was mandatory I could see the problem. If it's optional I don't see how it's any different than me currently having to pay an isp and the isp giving companies the option to maintain their infrastructure so that consumers don't have to.
Because this is more directed and uses the user's past records and location to make calculations determining whether it is economically viable to offer that person(s) a ride. When used by Casinos and night clubs free taxi rides are far less of a risk because you are almost guaranteed to spend money there, all they have to do is get you in the door. With shops you run a far higher risk of shoppers that either browse or make low-end purchases. Because the model is more directed and user-specific it becomes a new business model that is patent-able.
I haven't really introduced Linux to anyone that didn't already had an interest, but I can't really see why a standard user would need to use the terminal for casual use on Mint or similair dists. Much of my work is administrating and maintaining Windows machines, my standard approach is to use cmd or PS for everything. At home I primarily use my laptop running Debian and even though I do have a terminal open at all time I rarely feel the need to use it. I'm actually surprised how satisfied I was with usability ootb (debian testing).
GE plans to use its MEMS switch to power a variety of in-house technologies, but is also offering it to the communications industry where its exceptional linearity enables what GE claims is "true 4G" applications that run at up to 3 Gbit/s rather that the 300 Mbit/s typical of 4G implementations today. >To boot, the new GE MEMS switch has an ultra-low insertion loss of just 10 nanowatts, thereby extending the battery life of otherwise power-hungry 4G smartphones.
If you're having blood drawn every three months, this isn't going to change much of anything for you. You're still getting poked with a needle, maybe one less vial might be drawn? Each different color top vial has a different preservative in it to prevent cell breakdown before the tests are run. For the bulk of lab tests, one vial is generally sufficient for all that needs to be drawn off that particular "top", so if a green and purple are needed, nothing changes, versus needing two greens (almost never happens!) It's not going to space out your lab draws, nor is it going to minimize needle pokes if you're going in once every few weeks/months. The only people who will benefit will be inpatients where the doctor wants to run more tests within a certain time frame if the lab doesn't dispose of the remainder. It does nobody any good to see how you are today based on yesterdays blood work while you're inside the hospital, same for using 3 month old blood outside the hospital, it's useless.
The process sounds similar to how blood sugar is tested via a simple pinprick. The entire case boils down to whether the test can be drawn off capillary blood (finger stick) versus venous blood. Most tests can't because it's not a true indicator for many levels. It just happens to be for glucose (Thankfully! It would be horrible if we couldn't check blood sugars instantaneously at the bedside.) But you're far more likely to get wildly inaccurate results of potassium levels from a capillary single stick with a small sample size (i.e. one or two drops).
Interesting technology and I like the approach they are using for pricing transparency. HOWEVER, Theranos is NOT the only company developing this kind of technology and the tech is NOT a gamechanger especially when it comes to rapid testing. The four hours listed in the article is far behind some companies' technologies that offer a time-to result of under 15 minutes. Multiplexing capabilities are kind of trumped up too, ("30 tests with one drop of blood") since it's capable of performing sequential, not parallel, tests on the same sample. The biggest problem I have with this company is that they rely on the central laboratory model, which just isn't the future of diagnostics. This is like Microsoft coming out with the Zune right before the iPhone hit the market: kinda cool, but who cares. There are A LOT of diagnostics companies (startups and large incumbents, alike) developing point-of-care diagnostics platforms that can be placed in a doctor's office or clinic. They reduce the same human errors that Theranos claims it reduces and offer results in a tenth of the time, allowing physicians to know a diagnosis before a patient leaves the office.
Having worked in a lab at a hospital for two years, I can tell you that has very little to do with the actual cost of doing the test and everything to do with the insanity that is the insurance system. I would enter orders for lab work on occasion into our Meditech system and it really is the "who's line is it anyway" version of pricing. It's all made up because Medicare says we can charge one thing, so we ask for this much, and then the insurance company will give us this much. I think my hospital "billed" $16 per blood draw that I did (with re-draws not being charged, so that covered a patient's phlebotomy services for the entire day). That was almost never the amount the hospital got back, unless you payed cash, because people that paid for their own services had no negotiating power and got royally fucked over. Also, I was on the low end of volume for draws (my shift was focused on stats, timed draws, codes, the wild stuff that happens outside the regular draw schedule) but I still probably averaged 5-10 patients an hour on the rare normal day. That could get up to 50/hour if I was working the outpatient clinic. But, I only made $15/hour, as well as the other phlebotomists who did way more draws per hour than me. We never saw that money, and it was actually a pretty honest hospital, so I'm pretty sure they would ask for $16, and maybe get $2.
Once upon a time there was a proof of concept website that measured your uniqueness on the internet from all available data. They also offered up other interesting things like history sniffing via some well-timed link color checking method.
It's proportional. Here's a way to think about it: suppose I have a fair coin - I can flip that to get a string of random 1s and 0s (heads and tails): I get 1 bit of entropy each time I toss the coin (so if I toss it 8 times, I've got 8 bits of entropy). With me so far? If I had a double-headed coin, there'd be no entropy in each toss, because the outcome would be predetermined. Each toss gives 0 bits of entropy. But there's a middle-ground between the two. Imagine a weighted coin, balanced so that it's a 60%/40% chance. On average, I'd statistically expect to get 6 "1s" for every 4 "0s". A 60%/40% chance isn't far off "fair", but it's enough to reduce the amount of entropy generated to about 0.97 bits per toss. Because of the increased predictability, tossing my weighted coin a hundred times generates about the same amount of entropy as tossing a fair coin only 97 times. So how does this apply to browser fingerprinting. Well: let's take a simple model and assume that you're being fingerprinted based on a combination of your browser, your operating system, and the version of Flash you've got installed. Some combinations will be more-common than others: if you're running IE11 on Windows 8 with the latest version of Flash, you'll blend in a lot more-easily than if you're running Opera 21 on Solaris with a 6-month-old version of Flash installed. And because the ratios of people with each different "fingerprint" aren't nice round numbers, the number of bits of entropy that are assumed from each factor aren't nice round numbers either. This can be approximated as a series of weighted dice: the "browser" die is more likely to roll "Firefox" than "Lynx", and so on, and - just like our weighted coin - this directly affects the relative entropy.
Disabling XMLHttpRequest would never be sufficient. Once my Javascript fingerprinting code had run, there are plenty of other ways it could send a message back to the server. For example, it could add an <img> to the page whose src contained the fingerprint. Or a CSS file. Or just a CSS style that resulted in the loading of a font or an image from the server. Or it could just tamper all of the hyperlinks to contain the relevant data, so that as soon as you clicked a link you were identified.
Really sorry I'm under strict orders to not say anything. If you look at the cost of other routers it will be in that ballpark. So to sum it up... There's no spec to compare to... And no price... Because OP's now " under strict orders " not to answer the questions OP said ... >I’d be happy to answer them here.(sic) ... in the advertisement above? OK... You just lost me (cos IMO you're a bollocks, there is no fucking "ballpark" just a video with some chav wittering about game latency, and his sister's "1direction Youtube party").
This is not a problem waiting to be solved. It is already solved, they just don't give a shit enough to sell it because it's not a gaudy, flashy feature. Plus, they're addicted to planned obsolescence and selling you new batteries when the old one stops holding a charge. A crazy battery life is still a livable battery life when it stops holding a charge. A shit battery life is completely useless when it stops holding a charge. Meaning you don't wait till you buy a new phone instead of buying a new battery. I love my galaxy s4, and will probably buy an s5 soon, but does anyone believe the NFC chip needed to be in the fucking battery for any reason except to push the price of batteries to $50? Profit. All about profit. Everything holding back technological advancements can be traced to fucking profit.
I think you're painting a bit of a gray issue very black and white. This almost to me suggests cars are inherently good. This is not the case. Cars have brought with them many negative traits. Many of which have put our planet in a bad state. Politically and environmentally.
My point is that you will probably be able to charge your device if you use it in situations that would allow your phone to drop down to 10%. No shit you're having trouble keeping your phone alive if you play with your new Gear VR for two hours. People always compare smartphones to their older brick-style ones but don't get that you don't use your phone as such. It's a device for all sorts of battery intensive activities; mobile Internet or media usage of all sorts simply won't allow the comparison to older phones that really had no other use than texting and calling people. And this has changed drastically. There were tons of phones that could drop by half or even more within a day without usage , it tends to simply not happen that much anymore with current devices. Sure, you have to be aware of power hogs software-wise, but a bit of scrutiny and research will go a long way allowing you to prevent these kinds of issues.
Exactly this. Plus 75% of these people hadn't even heard of 4K televisions. They aren't exactly wearable tech's target market. 2% of 1000 did want them though. Considering how expensive they are, 20 people out of 1000 being interested in purchasing them is actually quite positive.
Better batteries can be done like this... 1) Newer technology (battery tech is developing kinda slow...it's Li-Ion for now) 2) More efficiency (we are seeing progress here such as Android 5.0 project Volta) 3) Bigger battery size (This is happening too, smaller components means room for a bigger battery) Now the NEGATIVE trend.... 1) Thin phones.... This is the issue. If you take away 1mm, it means the battery is 1mm thinner. Personally I don't need a super thin phone. It also makes it weaker (iPhone 6 plus bendgate...) So
I don't have to worry about anything, because I'm using an Android phone. And Google would never EVER do such a thing. Hell, the company even says: "Don't be evil."
Well, if you look closely: [ Emphasis mine] > the United States has always been on the forefront of trying to promote civil liberties , that we have traditions of due process that we respect , that we have been a consistent partner of yours in the course of the last 70 years, and certainly the last 25 years, in reinforcing the values that we share . And so occasionally I would like the German people to give us the benefit of the doubt
I think thats just unfettered capitalism. I think of corporations as seeking the path of least resistance/greatest profit. That isn't necessarily a bad thing, but it can't be the only motivation governing our economy and society. Thus, some regulations are needed.
ITT: people who think Sprint truly cares. This will probably get buried or downvoted to hell, but I need to rant. I don't think I've ever been angrier with a company than with Sprint. I've even dealt with Comcast several times before and they don't come close to making me feel a desperate need to check into a mental facility before I destroy the fucking planet. Unlimited data + shit as fuck coverage through most areas? Might as well say goodbye to data entirely. It took me anywhere between five and infinity mins to run a Google search. Instagram rarely loaded. I sat beside people with AT&T, Verizon, and t-mobile for an hour and watched them scroll through their feeds while mine never got past a gray spinning wheel. Need GPS? Better fucking search destinations up with wifi and save the damn directions before you head anywhere cause you never know when you'll be lost for the next 10-15 mins while your location slowly updates. Any speed aside from LTE is as slow or worse than dial up. At least I never wanted to smash a $700 device with a fucking hammer every day. My data consumption dropped to well below 1 GB a month because it was a waste of time and absolutely infuriating to wait for things to load. Their website showed 4G/LTE for most areas around me, but that didn't mean shit. What's even more infuriating? Having been lied to about data speeds and being talked into a contract free plan that's worse than actually having a contract. Prior to signing up, they told us LTE was being set up throughout our city and we'd have incredibly high speeds by end of our second month. Half a year rolls around and LTE is nonexistent, go to Sprint about it and they give us the run around, tell us our phones just need to update with their server by pressing and sending several numbers. Didn't do bat shit. But wait, there's more!! To use wonderfully priced Sprint service, you need to have a Sprint eligible phone. And as a condition to the contract free plan, if we wanted to leave, we had to pay off our cell phones at full price! Well, that made sense when we signed on because why would they give out free phones, right? Not a problem, sounds fair. So we purchased new ones from them. Well fuck, after several months of absolutely shitty service, we are now miserable, angry people desperate to leave. So we pay it off. NOW HERE'S THE KICKER! Their reps will tell you you can unlock your phone after paying it off if you decide to leave. You can then use it with 'other' carriers, but by 'other', they REALLY meant maybe, possibly, with carriers OVERSEAS. Cause most Sprint phones are designed to work ONLY WITH Sprint's network. SO, YOU MORON, FUCK WHAT THE REP SAID TO YOU ABOUT UNLOCKING YOUR PHONE AND FUCK THOSE UNLOCK CODES YOU CALLED CS TO GET! After switching, you realize that Sprint has been laughing its ass off the entire time because even though you PAID for your God damn phone, they won't let you use it with any other domestic carrier. Congrats you big dumb bitch, you paid them big figures for a brick!!! If you bought an iPhone you can fuck yourself in the ass with a giant dick and sob to in a corner. Don't have one? Go just use your phone. It's useless anyway. Guess it's true what they say about iPhone users being stupid - well, you are, at least! Essentially, you're locked into their service by the phone, rather than contract. You didn't realize this because you were too simpleminded and busy to research every aspect of your phone plan. .... Actually, you know what. There is a company that pissed me off just as much and it was MyMathLab because it kept returning my submissions as wrong even when they were right. Apparently, it's designers are as brainless as I am.
The whole situation that revolved around Carrier IQ was that it could have been sending rather sensitive information to Carrier IQ. It was revealed that the software could essentially do [key logging and it mostly did it in plain text]( It's better to watch the whole video to get a better understanding of what it did, but essentially it keylogged and it had a hell of a lot of permissions that were really questionable. To top it all off, users had no idea about it and were not given an opt-out option. However there really wasn't that much information regarding whether or not that data was being sent to Carrier IQ or not. The software was meant for Carrier IQ to report back to carriers about certain issues regarding the phone network and battery life issues, but that's what Carrier IQ said. The backlash behind it was well justified though, users were not aware of the software and were not given any sort of consent about it.
It gets more clicks with this title. It wouldn't have gone viral, certainly not on /r/technology. The most trafficked articles used to be super pro-Apple targeted towards the "YOU DONT HAVE IPHONE? U MUST BE POOR!" assholes, but sometime recently the scales tipped and Android users became the insufferable "YOU DONT HAVE ANDROID? U MUST BE STUPID!" douchebags.
I'm now waiting for some pictures of what this thread looks like through
i think they accidentally made a scraper. cause its definitely eating SEO weighted keywords, which are also the most common words connected with the item you are looking for. which means that for the next week or so, this will be the highest ranking site for any given keyword, until google delists them. i think they have ignored the current state of seo optimization, and forgot that the most common phrases and words are there for pagerank, not for information. you'd almost have to weight the algorithm to look for least common, to get the unique content. and if it's for a service oriented item, where there is a lot of competition... all bets are off and you end up with "Pomona Squirrel Removal Raccoon Bat Skunk Bird Removal, of, and, be excluded, professionals."
Here's something you don't appear to understand, OP: there are still a great many people in America who do not even interact with the Internet on a daily basis. I would venture to say that most Redditors live and work in an environment where the Internet is a part of daily life for people besides them: i.e. your friends have Facebook pages, your mom buys shoes online, you know people who work in IT. But I assure you, there is a large segment of the population that simply sees little use not only in broadband, but in the Internet at all. I worked at a residential construction company this summer in a mid-size city in the South, and only two of the thirty-some people I worked with even had Facebook pages . One supervisor out of four had a computer in his office. All the inventory and charge-outs for tools, lumber etc. was done by hand and on the honor system. True, the people in the main office used computers to do payroll, expense reports, etc. (based on time and inventory sheets filled out by hand), but the actual labor force rarely interacted with the front office at all except for the supervisors. The point is, there are a lot of people out there for whom spending millions on a national broadband network makes about as much sense as spending it on building a giant washing machine in the Mojave Desert: it's something that they can't see the applications of in their lives, because they don't really use it or understand it to begin with, and have been getting along fine without it for a while.
I've heard that while the average population density of the US is low, if you compare the density of coastal US cities to those in, say, northern Europe, where 100mbps lines are common, the densities are about the same. Tokyo is denser than anything in America, but I don't know about South Korea. I'm guessing it's roughly similar.
Well, I've spent all day using IE9, which is probably more than all of my IE time since Firefox's first release combined, and I have to say, it's definitely usable-ish. I love the new UI. Download manager feels like it actually belongs in Windows 7 (I'm staring at you, Mr. Firefox-Aero-Glass-Overuser. Honestly, what a shit design). The favorites bar is now hidden by default, which may not bother some but I use it extensively in Firefox to browse to pretty much any given site I regularly visit, most reduced only to their icons without text. Unfortunately, enabling the favorites bar produces a very ugly, out-of-place IE8-esque bar that completely clashes with the overall design. I hope they fix the look of this by the time IE goes gold. While lots of things in IE have been moved to the new Aero style UI elements from their old Windows 9x-era designs, there are still plenty of things that show up in a dialog box that hasn't had its code updated in years and, were it not for the OS providing the styles for basic controls, would look just as it would when it was first designed in 2001. Thankfully, the most common ones you'd see in IE8 ('Want to save this password?', 'IE isn't the default browser') have been replaced. My last real complaint is the browser preferences. It's not really labeled as IE-specific settings, it sort of lives in the Control Panel and meshes with dial-up connection preferences and some other miscellaneous stuff. Microsoft should give IE it's own preferences window and they should update it to a modern interface. I want way more control than they currently give me. It should be on par with Firefox, in my opinion. IE9 is a massive step in the right direction, though. I do hope we get to preview a few more features or something before its release. Firefox's 'app tabs' are great for me; pinning sites to the taskbar with IE9 just takes up far too much room to be useful for me, though.
the difference between the two is that an ebook uses up very little space on a hard drive somewhere and it can be copied ad naseum. A real book takes up floor space or space in the warehouse. In order to bring in more titles, you need to free up space. This isn't true in the digital realm; one can simply add more disks, or replace the existing disks with higher capacity ones. That means that real books go on sale to encourage the freeing up of floor space. Ebooks on the other hand have no reason to go on sale. You pick a price and go with it. You might lower your price if there was a competitor with a lower one, but at this point most people are either buying books for their nook, or buying them for their kindle. There's nothing in terms of competition, which inflates prices.
Here's your single reason why it's impossible to turn off: If you are not paying for it, you're not the customer; you're the product being sold. Despite google pretending to do no evil , they're not your friend, they're a giant transnational corporation aiming to make the most profit by profiling you and exposing you to ads. Ever heard of the [filter bubble]( ? A solution is to ditch google for duckduckgo which do [not bubble]( and do [not track]( you.
Google's geolocation is worse than just the easily fixable language redirection. I DON'T FUCKING WANT LOCAL RESULTS. My ip locates to a town or 2 over and this is great for restaurants. When I'm trying to buy something not food related I want results from the whole country and even the world. This is the whole point of mail order. I don't want to know that ripoff retailer X has it at the store for 3x what it costs on ebay. I keep setting the localization to USA but it keeps going RIGHT back. Something is wrong with google. Lately the results I get seem "filtered". News articles I read on reddit don't come up when searching for them by content. Instead, I get a page full of irrelevant and outdated shit. When searching for other information this pattern repeats, front page is full of completely irrelevant links mostly to products, link farms or scams. I started noticing the decline right after they forced localized search down our throats. If you're going to make money off of me at least give me what I want. I think sharks have been jumped and we need a new search engine.
So, in 1993 I had an email account with unlimited capacity. I could login and browse it in less than a second. Yes I could even "search" it. AMAZING! OMG SEARCH!!!!!! SEARCH!!!! I had an unlimited ftp account where I could share files. My computer booted in a minute or two. I had a word processor which was better than google docs. Let's see, this was ~20 years ago?
For people who just surf the internet, maybe use google docs spreadsheet, and play an occasional video? yes. unquestionably. If cost is not an issue (and keeping in mind maintenance cost, which will be higher for a non-techy on a IBM-PC arc. system), then I would say Mac for sure. For people who use one of the many software tools that Mac excels at, graphics layout, most video editing, etc? it would depend on the person, but sure. gamers? nah. emulation works pretty well, but there are issues as I'm sure you know. I'm a Long-time Mac hater. part of that is because I was a Apple II enthusiast, then a early Lisa user, and I hated what Apple became when they adopted the closed hardware\software model; it's true, as DemDude, who had to be right about something, said, you can use Mac hardware for more than just their traditional fields, and if you are developing for the web or writing an android app or, of course, IOS, then Mac rocks. In my case it wouldn't work too well. I'm retired, but do some consulting still, and I've been a "paid professional" in a LOT of different fields in the past; this week, the laptop I'm typing this on ( A HP DV8230US has done the following: surfed the web, played flash games on cartoon network, piped previously recorded hulu & netflix to my TV. converted ebooks to Palm format. ran a security webcam software package when I was gone from the house, converted various video's to various formats. Burned a "Backup" DVD from a encrypted DVD-9 format. ran various file recovery software packages on a crashed but booted from liveCD PC in another state. noise removal on one of my daughters songs with audacity and cool edit 2.0. Did some biovision motion data refinement using Poser and some older tools (including a DOS one) I like for a friends animation in 3DS. played Oblivion (me), Mechwarrior 4 (8 year old son) and Call of Duty MW2 (20 year old son). if you go back a few more days, I could add ms-expression studio & messing with a app I wrote a while back for WebOS that I'm trying to make work on android using eclipse (I'm a bad programmer, but try it every once in a while), but that's more than a week. If a Mac laptop could do all those things without a lot of tweaking or modification, I would clearly admit its total superiority.
Why hasn't anyone argued that Jobs had bad style? I think his "taste" as an artist or designer was rather derivative, pretentious, and boring. Making things "sleek" doesn't necessarily make them better. His products remind me of bad minimalist art. All the boredom, none of the meaning. And while he tweaked his way into "easier" user interfaces, why hasn't anyone complained that his products were intellectually unrewarding? Music Instruments, Paint Brushes, and welding torches take years to master. Job's operating systems made me feel like the lowest common denominator, and did nothing to encourage me to learn.
History shows that people in power will do anything to maintain their power. And so it is that we see how US legislators are in a rush to control the Internet at the direct expense of the civil liberties, human rights, and democratic ideals which they have sworn to uphold in the name of their constituents. The scary thing is that we are in the midst of a race: If government control of Internet arrives before the masses are aware of their digital rights, then there will little chance for them to ever wake up and understand what was stolen from them before they even knew its value. Their perception will be shaped by filtered, censored, and sock-puppet filled distortions of the world in which they live; a truly dystopian vision stolen right from Orwell. Regardless of the motivations of the ruling class, and whether they think that, in some twisted fashion, they are protecting the 99% from the evils of the world, or they are blatantly selling-out to their colleagues in the 1%, US politics have failed massively and now clearly pose a threat to the very people they are intended to protect. Both parties have been corrupted by the influence of the $, and we are now in the endgame for control of the masses.
Yes, you are first! Everybody is impressed, having never seen anyone ever post the word "first" in any online forum before. Seeing that you posted first is what we live for. I have nominated you for best post of the year. You are special, and, dogonit, everybody likes you!
So many opinions. So made sides. I'm not sure mine is the right one. Why not attack both? Stop buying their products, and, lobby the hell out of politicians. We'll need everyone on board. Why don't we just go on a full-out boycott already? And when Hollywood starts barking again, we pick a day and meltdown politicians' phone lines. Can't we do both? I am ITCHING for a full blown boycott already. I'm totally prepared to watch indie films, play indie video games, etc. People may be afraid of letting go of the culture that the entertainment industry has so vastly created in the last 20 years, thus leaving them with all the money in the world for current, and, future advancements, which will make their product more desirable. But fuck it! Seriously--it's just over kill. You can be just as entertained playing a video game less inclined than something on PS3 or Wii. Those are great products; great advancements. But they're over-kill in terms of the satisfied emotion you get from playing them. You can fulfill that desire by playing that game where you're lying down on your bed and throwing a tennis ball toward the cieling, seeing how close you can get it to rest just under the cieling, but not hit the cieling. Wait, doesn't everybody play this game, or is that just me? lulz. Being entertained is an emotion. That's all it is. You are entertained when you play a shitty Flash web-based game. You know those games? The ones you've also wasted countless hours on? Those video games, friends, will give you the entertainment sustenance as well. Anyway. We really can do this. I think what it really, reeeeaaally boils down to: How many of us want it that badly. I've been feeding my uncle sopa/pipa articles since mid-January. We always send links to videos back and forth; we have a dialogue. Haven't heard a peep out of him from all these emails. My uncle is a regular internet user. But he's also in his 50s. And he's also somewhat old school. He probably doesn't care. Because he probably buys all his stuff anyway. Now how many people are just like my uncle... that see SOPA/PIPA headlines all over the internet, and whiiizzzz right by that shit like a skinny person who disregards Cinnabon and McDonalds without even thinking twice (Not saying only fat people eat junk; it's Louis CK quote; sure you guys knew anyway). To sum up my post/
If you think fucking with big company money will do nothing, you've been ignoring how desperate businesses are for their bottom line. This will affect small workers more than big wigs, at first, but that is just a start of the downfall. Corporations that lay off employees willy-nilly often have trouble finding suitable, skilled replacements, especially when trying to hire them for less than their previous workers. It destroys company morale, and the company begins to collapse from the inside. People working in the industry; I suggest you be on guard, but continue to defend the internet. If you want to promote your work without big corporations, you will need it. If Operation Black March is just a bunch of people holding back on what they want for 4 weeks, it's not going to be any different than people saying they bought less gas today. There will be a loss in profit, but they will recover. However, if people do this, and maybe some of them see they don't need as much entertainment as they thought, they might continue to spend less and less. That's something noticeable and long-term. Maybe more people will find the art of creation more enjoyable than consuming. Hell, maybe someone will discover a way for /them/ to make money in the time saving it. I suggest Black March include not watching a single new TV show online, offline, on the air, downloaded or bought. I understand some programs are still good, just like some movies, but it is a massive media industry that needs to feel the sting just as much as the others. Maybe there's some old stuff you own that can keep you from losing it. I know I need it without TV. But politicians need to hear the message too. If you can't elect out the dickholes, start demanding they do things in a certain way. Demand that they publicly announce how much funding they received in lobbying, and from who, the same way they demand we be honest and prompt with tax returns and how much money /we/ made, unless we want to go to jail. Politicians should be jailed for lying about funding. While the system is rigged to support the rich, it's because everyone accepts it with passive complaints. Do not let off them. Ever. They are just waiting for people to get tired of complaining and go back to watching Jersery Shore. Make them operate within the same laws that we do. There is no justifiable reason they should not, so do not listen to any bullshit reasoning they have. Demand that people who steal from their employees receive just as harsh a fine as anyone who steals from the media industry. Demand that any law that deals with censorship be destroyed, and keep public outrage high. Black out websites, remove any advertising that comes from pro-censorship companies. If Reddit can pin down the worst offenders, as well as the companies most likely to go under, I suggest Reddit seriously gets on board as one powerful hive-mind. SOPA laws are already making legal sharing websites recoil in fear. Make their companies do the same when pro-SOPA companies start to bankrupt. Let companies keep trying to buy their way through law. Let them waste money on other old men who don't understand how communication and technology works. Let them ignore copyright protection that has proven effective and doesn't create a fucking dangerous system for free speech and free creativity. Let them waste the money they are so desperate to save.
We can't allow an industry that behaves in such horrible ways to thrive. The politicians are not the ones who are powerful, it is the industry that has the money to corrupt people to their will. The industry exists, because it has been allowed to exist. It has thrived, generating billions of dollars, off of us. The people that support such an industry are allowing it to exist. The situation isn't just one or the other. Our government is extremely corrupt, with the ability to turn politicians by waving money in front of their faces. To go along with this there are many industries that are waving money in front of the politicians faces. These industries purely do this in order to make more money, there is no other motive. The goal of corporations, of pretty much all people in America is, "give me more money!" We have equated money with things that it is not. Money is not happiness, money is not health. Money is not taking care of your environment for future generations. Money is not any of these things that are supposed to be good. What is happening is people are sacrifice things that are actually important, that are REAL in order to obtain more money. They sacrifice their ethics by screwing over others, sacrifice the health of others by forcing them to work in horrible conditions, they sacrifice our environment, all for one thing: PROFIT. I think it's time we stop this. We need to all sit down, and decide how we want to prioritize as a country. Our happiness, health, and the way we treat others should be more important than profit. To do this we simply need to put pressure on businesses by supporting only the ones who behave in such a way. We should create businesses that behave in such a way. Spread the word, and tell people to put happiness and health first. While doing this any politician who demonstrates they value these criteria should be supported. If they lie, kick 'em out. In order to make change happen, there has to be pressure, and reason for this corrupt process to change.
As a 1st gen concept.. I think it's pretty sweet and has a lot of potential. One thing that disappoints me is the accuracy & intuitiveness of the augmented-data seems pretty "loose" or "sloppy". For example: If I look down at a coffee cup, it should recognize the coffee cup typically contains a hot liquid,. .and superimpose the coffee's liquid temperature on the surface of the liquid. If I'm climbing/descending.. I want a rolling indicator of altitude. (and Temp, Barometer, Humidity, Wind speed,etc) If I look at a car/bus/motorcycle,etc.. .I want to see the speed it's going.
You actually bring up a funny point in how the Internet has already affected how we think. Our knowledge is getting so vast that instead of straight off knowing a fact we have pointers to remember where that information is stored. I.e Wikipedia.
I assure you I have an addictive personality. Cigarettes, Crappy but delicious foods, alcohol and of course the internet. I just think to myself I will have plenty of time to digest media another day, or after I get X done instead of getting back on the webs.
well it's not really that easy to get a smartphone without a texting plan. Personally, I rarely use my Verizon number, and do almost all of my communication via Google Voice and various internet services. If I could access 3G on the go but not have a verizon number or texting, I'd be fine. I'm willing to pay some money for the convenience of having access to the world when I'm not within range of a Wifi signal.
It's a shame the article was written so unprofessionally; it makes some decent points but people reading an article on TED aren't going to need the over the top commentary the author employs in order to keep their interest. Some TED videos have been truly inspiring, but it's time to remove the rose tinted glasses we have for it and start getting a bit more cynical.
Idk why all you guys are talking to me about all this security shit. I refute someones point about online bullying and you take the one guy who disagrees and throw everything at him. My only concern in this conversation is whether cyber bullying would increase or decrease after an ID system is implemented. I'm not worrying about security, personal data, etc. I stop caring at that point. I'm only interested in the social psychology aspect of it. That was the theme of my reply to MyShitUsername and will remain the theme of the rest of my comments here. If you want to debate internet security logistics, I am not qualified to do so and I refer you to other parts of this thread where more qualified people are talking about it. The only relevant part of your comment I will reply to is: > I don't think an asshole online is also getting arrested offline If it is actual harassment, people can press charges against them
You know this was in 2005 and 2006, right? Nothing to do with the current Oatmeal case and related lawsuits. I was actually referring to the wiki entry itself, and all of the attention being brought upon the lawyer. Obviously the Hivemind wasn't responsible for the lawyer being banned.
Well honestly I liked tpb. I will honestly admit that I used to download games. tons of games. On the same hand I had no money, and no job because nobody wants to hire a 17 year old kid straight out of high school. Even mcdonalds didn't want me because the manager is biased against teens. Now I work in a call center making twice what I'd make at mcdonalds and bought 5x the games i downloaded. I only played maybe 25% of those paid for games so far.
or, more commonly, pirate the everloving shit out of everything even when you have money. why? because its free. proof: there are 20+ torrents for "The Binding of Isaac" on tpb and the top most one has 420 seeders. That game sells on steam for $4.99.
A cable in this context refers to diplomatic cables which is basically just text documents passed between diplomats of a country. Bradley Manning was accused of leaking about 250,000(?) of these to Wikileaks, many of them revealing shady practices of the US Government and airing their dirty laundry in general. Sadly there were no Top Secret or Classified stuff in there, but if you see the kind of stuff in these confidential and secret cables (such as providing child prostitutes to afghan police) one must assume there is much worse stuff in higher access levels.
Torrenting isn't stealing, and if online services didn't artificially limit what I could do with the file and where I could view it, I would purchase a far greater number of movies. The market has completely left them behind and rather than attempting to innovate and update, they use the government and attempt to force people back into a dying industry. The Internet is the number one source of media by lightyears today and the DVD and Blu-Ray markets are already dead, we simply don't need billion dollar distribution companies and billion dollar legal industries anymore to provide media and entertainment to customers. The price and the market should change accordingly. The torrent industry is a great example of the level of convenience the customers want. If the movie MPAA companies weren't retarded, and could get over themselves and the fact that the market will leave them bankrupt if they don't change with the times, they would see a massive opportunity. But instead they see problems, hassles, and enemies. I say let them go bankrupt. BTW, pirating is not stealing. If i copied your car to have one of my own, and left yours right where it was, did i steal your car? How would you even know i did this, you would have to invade my privacy to find out. One does not have the right to a profit simply because something costs money to create. The market no longer has a cost for replication of media. They are profiting from a physical limitation that no longer exists and has become an unnatural force in the market. And the only way for them to maintain their system against the ever changing Internet, is to actively send armed soldiers into the homes of regular people, ruin their lives, attack them, fine them, force them into lengthy, stressful litigation, or force them to pay exorbitantly stupid amounts of money.
That's not the problem. Just because it's widely available in a digital format doesn't mean they have caught up with the market and pirating should now be non-existent. Prices also change, sometimes drastically, when a market shifts. The question is, what service do those lawyers and distributers provide now that copying and pasting a file is free? The market no longer needs or wants them, and if there were a simple easy to use, accessible market where creators could post their music/media etc and make 90% of the money, then they could charge literally a few cent for an entire album and be making MORE than they make under the current structure. This is what the market is waiting for. You absolutely have to charge a high price to produce content, purchase and burn millions of DVDs (before you even know if they will sell), print labels and covers, purchase or make cases for each, ship, advertise, coordinate, and distribute millions upon millions of them... but when the technology changes to where all you need to do is post the digital copy onto some rented server space and it's immediately accessible to everyone in the world, you can't charge the same fucking price. When your costs disappear, competition brings down the price. The current movie and music market however is killing their competition by using government force, and calling those who attempt to move forward, "thieves and pirates." --- ANALOGY: Heres a good way to think about the price shift. In the past it could cost sometimes a hundred dollars for a popular newspaper subscription that lasts about 3 months. (they have to print newspapers, find writers, and ship them out to every house so the price makes since) Now imagine if every Internet news site that posted and edited other peoples articles at a rate of about 15 or 20 a day tried to charge you $100 for 3 months subscription and even worse, removed the articles after 3 days and you had to pay AGAIN to read them. Would you buy their service? I personally don't pay for a single piece of news. Got rid of TV a long time ago. Now imagine that the few largest and most popular newspaper companies used the government to forcibly shut down every other website that attempted to give the news to people for free and fined or imprisoned those who downloaded their articles elsewhere. Would you call the underground torrent news networks "thieves?". It's easy to see in this example how stupid that would be because the market has already left them behind. The old movie and music markets however continue to thrash about in futile resistance to reality. The price for media would naturally fall (and already would have done so) if the distributers weren't exercising a monopolistic power through government force, flexing their patent guns, and trying to remove the conveniences and features provided by our technology so that they can keep their jobs and profit margins. Pirating is a huge market for movies simply because it's the only market that's actually up to date with our technology. End of story.
You only get the advantages of the 'backlog clearing protocol' on heavily congested networks: >a single WiFi access point with 45 connected devices — experienced a 700% increase in throughput AFAIK DD-wrt is intended for consumer grade hardware, so unless you're having some kind of wireless LAN party you'll never see any of the benefits of this, and anyway gamers generally prefer wired connections to minimise latency. So if it's just a few people in your house sharing the same AP, this isn't going to benefit you at all. The only way this might be useful would be if you were a large organisation with many oversubscribed AP's, (think university lecture theater) running this new protocol would save you having to increase the density of AP's per user, so a possible cost-saving. The advantage of this will be to the organisation that has to pay for the infrastructure though, not so much to users.
I don't know what you're talking about. Seems pretty reasonable to say that the Emerson 32" LCD/LED TV (model LC195EM9-2, serial J32850590, manufactured in August) is of flaky quality, especially if purchased from Walmart on Black Friday 2011. I, too, would be highly dissappointed in the Emerson 32" LCD/LED TV if I'd bought it from Walmart on Black Friday 2011
It's a conspiracy, sure, but I'm certain companies do this to get more sales. Case in point, my PS2. My original "phat" model slowly lost functionality - first DVDs, the eventually PS2 games themselves, effectively leaving it useless since I still have my PS1. I checked on forums, and hundreds of others were experiencing the same issue in the same time frame. And the funny thing? The PS2 functionality -y'know, the bit that makes it operable - dropped for all of us around the time the PS2 Slim was being released.
Went through a stage as a rebellious 14 year old Christian scholarship student where I read up heavily on witchcraft and black magic. Backmasking and that shit. Anyway, I knew my Nan had been into tarot and ouija back in the day, and I had been pestering her to tell me about it. Instead, she told me she'd been dealing tarot one day, and that a voice had come out of the television when she changed channels past one tuned to static, warning her to, 'Stop!' She threw out all her gear that day and never touched anything 'supernatural' again. So, I'm lying in my room about 1am one Saturday night, playing Pool of Radiance in-between furious bouts of sock stiffening, and thinking about how cool it would be to summon a minor demon, just an imp or something (I know, look, everything was different before the internet, okay?). Then the TV goes, "BLUARAGGAH REEBLUF SLRUNTAGHA FLAAARGARLA TRUGH?" really fucking loudly. I swear to God I was so shocked I couldn't even reach over to turn it off. I just lay there shaking through intermittent bursts of Cthulhu Channel. Eventually I manned up and turned it off. I went to the kitchen to collect my thoughts and through the open window, I could just hear the neighbour in his shed. He was a radio ham and had just installed this huge mast in his backyard, and as I listened to him talk to some guy on the other side of the planet, I realised his voice had the same cadence as the voice of horror coming out of the TV. Somehow my TV (remember that many years ago, we only had analogue TVs, children) was picking up a very distorted version of his broadcasts. It only happened that night and one other, but holy schmoly it scared the shit out of me both times.
You're right -- it's not. Assuming it's been compressed from lossless source or ripped as mp3 instead of transcoded, which it probably has been.
Replaced my 3310 to a Lumia phone. I was planning to buy Asha but the model that I wanted was not available so I tried Lumia. Biggest regret I've ever had. There are too many shortcomings to this supposedly "smart" phone. Capacitive navigation buttons are too easily misclicked, esp the search button Battery only last a day Alarm won't go off if phone is in powered down state Not possible to drag and drop media files or any file at all Non-native apps takes a very long time to load Heavily tied to MSN. In fact, you need an MSN account to do anything in the phone. Very hard to customize anything (ex. ringtones adheres to some very strict rules to use) No way to auto replace texts No way to filter incoming text messages
I think "HBO Quality" content like House Of Cards will be the exception, but the apparent success of the project shows that Netflix can be a viable carrier for original content. It puts them in a position to start picking up programming that major networks would never touch; programming that will be less expensive to license. Plus, if they stick to the "Whole season all at once" scheme, they can really offer some incentives - broadcast channels in particular are ridiculously finicky about cutting new shows that don't get legs after just a few episodes. The production company already spent the money to film 12 episodes and the network drops the show after 3 episodes, deciding it's worth more to show re-runs of Procedural Drama: City instead of just airing the rest of the season to see if it takes off. Nevermind that some of the best series took a whole season - sometimes multiple seasons - before they really got big. They just can't take the risk. Netflix, on the other hand, they don't need ratings to drive advertising revenue AND they essentially have unlimited "time slots" to show content (compared to broadcast where they basically have just 3 hours a day available for prime time content). They can license ANYTHING they think will grow legs and throw it out there for 6 months and just see what takes off. On the production side, with Netflix the production company gets a guarantee that the audience will at least have the opportunity to see and criticize a whole season, which frees them up to explore longer, more complex plot arcs. It may also free them somewhat from the high pressure broadcast production schedule that demands week-by-week writing and shooting where the plot is being made up on-the-fly (which damaged BSG, Lost, etc), allowing them to figure out where they want to go in the first episode and just go there, without the network tweaking it based on ratings from one week to the next. It will also enable more British-style short seasons which are cheaper to produce for the studios and cheaper to license for Netflix.
So I don't work for one, but I have had interviews working with several patent profiles companies (trolls). Based solely from these interviews, I believe these companies found a niche in the system in order to maintain the patent property value. My understanding (correct me if I am wrong) is they hold patent licenses from varies companies and search to insure the company who created the patent maintains economic value of the patent. The troll then searches for infringements and looks to settle first and lease the patent to the company that is infringing. If the company refuses then they go to court. The problem is most infringements come from overseas (mainly China) whose outright copy patent profiles. These companies if they refuse to settle, there is little the troll can threaten with.
Litigating the issue of sufficient commercialization would increase costs, but the hope is to eliminate large swaths of patent litigation entirely; I doubt that the former would be more expensive than the latter. I like the way you've zoomed out on this one. You can, and do, make a good argument that by wiping out a category of troll-based litigation, you'd reduce the overall social cost. However, you also have to take into the account the extent to which this would dissuade people from asserting patents that legitimately have value, which defeats the entire purpose of patenting, imposing a heavy indirect cost on innovation. Discovery costs are insane . Post-Sarbanes-Oxley litigation strategy is heavily influenced by the extent to which you can force your opponent to settle by bogging them down with collections, data, processing, printing, etc. My concern would be that the burden of proof on the person asserting their patent would be too great and would disincentivize patenting even novel inventions because the cost of protecting that invention would be too high. Why would I, as an inventor, patent something if I don't have the means to defend what is being patented in court? The cost is a very real concern. >Increasing maintenance fees seems like a more regressive strategy. Straight-up fees seem more likely to hurt small parties than the requirement that they attempt commercialization. For that, it's possible that the small firms could do so in a low-cost way, with the necessity of documenting it for potential litigation in mind. There's no way to get around a fee. It's a lower cost than settling or licensing from a troll. There are already fee reductions for so-called "micro-entities" in the US. This practice on net reduces the regressive nature of a fee structure. The issue with the idea that firms could log their marketing or commercialization efforts in a low-cost way is that it's incredibly difficult to log all of these efforts in such a way that they would be presentable to a court. It's still an additional cost in litigation- you have to log and host all of this information about licensing somewhere, and this will presumably consist of a huge array of materials, all of which have to be logged to deflect the likely allegation that you haven't sufficiently commercialized your IP. It would be an organizational nightmare for a lot of companies that invent heavily but don't have a strong IP leveraging strategy in place already.
I'm going to disagree with the hivemind and say that is terrible fucking idea. If EA dies, it'll affect the entire video game industry, including your precious Valve. EA owns a huge portion of the industry, and if it goes under, a lot of devs will lose their capital investment, and as such the whole damn ship will sink with EA, because no devs means no new games means no new console/hardware support means industry stagnation. What needs to happen is that EA needs to reform what it is doing and go in a new direction. You can hate EA all you want, but if they go under, the whole industry does too.
I hate to cut against the grain, which I normally agree with...But Spore was just okay. Not great like it was supposed to be. I bought it, I wasn't the happiest with my investment, due to the great preview I saw beforehand. I had some enjoyment out of it. I liked the concept foremost. Will Wright had great ideas for games and I believed him. I played sim city (2k, 3k, 4 ,steets), the original Sims (w/o expansions). I liked those games enough that I would pay for the creativeness he put into the gaming world....But then the dark cloud from EA loomed overhead and fucked it all to shit with the drm and the lack of depth in the game. I stopped buying games from EA from then on in '08. Still going strong... I know spore was a let down, but it was still ok due to the concept of it... This new Sim City isn't even on par with Spore. Sim City 5 is a facebook game (Our servers handle gifts between players. - Lucy Bradshaw). FUCK THAT.
EA didn't admit SimCity can run offline, what she said was they could've designed the game to support an offline mode and be completely different but they decided to go for the online social experience instead. This isn't the same as admitting it's an artificial limit that's only there to enforce DRM. I don't really see what the problem is, the only mistake they made was underestimate how many people would want to play the game. The issues were with server capacity. that's it. Also, all the people who say screw the developer's vision, no one is forcing you to play it. Just like any other game, you don't have to play it and if you buy it you can't return it. It's just the way it is with ALL GAMES. I've been disappointed after buying games plenty of time, I know I should wait to see real user reaction. SimCity is a great game and it seems the developers are planning to keep updating and fixing the real issues with the game (which one can learn of just by reading this sub).
Please don't cherry-pick and at least include the whole section. It specifically says: > a threat to the integrity, confidentiality, or availability of a system or network of a government or private entity or utility or any information stored on, processed on, or transiting such a system or network All of these terms are also defined by the bill: >(10) INTEGRITY- The term 'integrity' means guarding against improper information modification or destruction, including ensuring information nonrepudiation and authenticity. > (3) CONFIDENTIALITY- The term 'confidentiality' means preserving authorized restrictions on access and disclosure, including means for protecting personal privacy and proprietary information. > (1) AVAILABILITY- The term 'availability' means ensuring timely and reliable access to and use of information. > (13) UTILITY- The term 'utility' means an entity providing essential services (other than law enforcement or regulatory services), including electricity, natural gas, propane, telecommunications, transportation, water, or wastewater services.'.
Thanks, Draft_Punk! Zac from DDG here. Just wanted to say that we've been watching CISPA very closely. We've spoken with the EFF, ACLU, AccessNow, and other rights organizations and we're trying to make a push for people to contact their Senators now that it's gotten past the House. Important to note, though, is that it probably won't be called CISPA when it gets to the Senate. Whatever they decide to refer to it as, we should start drawing people's attention to individual points that need to be addressed. For example, the broadly defined scope of, "cybersecurity purposes." If we can get the attention drawn to exactly why this legislation is so dangerous, we have a really good shot of bringing it down. Last year, the Senate voted against the old version of CISPA by a very slim majority. This year, backers are using small changes to the legislation as a point of compromise, when in fact, the same issues remain. We've got to raise these concerns clearly and strongly.
Not quite. We don't send any user-information to any of our sources . Your searches on DuckDuckGo are private.
The thing is: With so many bills coming in an out of Congress, they don;t have TIME to read these things that are all in Legalese. They have to get
Because he feels that he's entitled to only read posts that he wants to read and that reading posts that he doesn't want to read somehow reduces his efficiency at doing fuck-all on reddit.
I don't like wasting bandwidth - I've had my tubes clogged before. Please summarize with reply in
Actually I ask now instead of googling. Maybe it's just me and how I love to learn, but long story short, it can kill a conversation. An example was a friend telling me about a program that let me watch doctor who online, for free! I was going to ask about it and be interested, but instead, I googled. Turns out it's just a proxy service that sets your ip from the UK... An option my current proxy has. On top of that, it had nothing to do with BBC or Doctor Who... It just happens the BBC allows people to view the show online but you need a european proxy.... (could be UK and not all of EU, but this is just an example, not a guide to watch DW). In the end instead of talking about it and me politely nodding, it turns into an explanation from me to her... When originally I was going to do the asking... Anyways
What? Any amount of RAM is empty at boot and need to be loaded with useful code, generally from slow non-volatile memory. Also ram size and ram speed are 2 separate limits.
If they have multiple surreptitious accesses to the standard volume over a period of time where you change the data in the hidden volume, they can see that the file has changed, but the standard volume has not. Now, you assuming you don't give them access to the key for the standard volume, they won't be able to tell that a hidden volume exists. As a side note, I think changing the header key (changing password/keyfile) when its been compromised won't help, your adversary may already know your master key.
Hate to be disagreeable, but as someone whose brother has spent a good deal of time in both, you're wrong. Jail is MUCH worse than prison over the long term. The difference in "yard time", classes/activities, amenities, full contact & lengthier visits in a lot of prisons (aka: not talking on phones and looking through thick bulletproof glass), etc is extensive.
From the Microsoft services EULA: "3.1. Who owns the content that I put on the services? Content includes anything you upload to, store on, or transmit through the services, such as data, documents, photos, video, music, email, and instant messages (“content”). Except for material that we license to you that may be incorporated into your own content (such as clip art), we do not claim ownership of the content you provide on the services. Your content remains your content, and you are responsible for it. We do not control, verify, pay for, or endorse the content that you and others make available on the services."
While I agree that it may not make a big difference, advertising is a data driven process. I guarantee advertisers have found that tracking across web pages has, to some degree, benefitted them financially. By how much, I do not no.
Actually way ahead of you, got ghostery installed. Sadly their business model is to block what you tell it to, and then selling the data of whats being blocked back to the companies that are being blocked, but, thats better than having several thousand cookies created. Also gets rid of those facebook like icons on every single fucking website.
I really don't understand the reasoning behind this; i'm drunk right now, but I really would like some to enlighten me as to why people are so against advertising cookies. I work in the search engine advertising industry, and have been for more than 3 years, so I feel like i'm fairly well versed here. The agency I work for manages the paid search & product listing ad campaigns for a good number of retailers, and i would guess a good 80% of people on reddit have clicked on one of our ads or shopped at one of our websites. Some info I will gladly tell you about us/our cookie: -It lasts 30 days. 30. That is VERY small in comparison to, say, Google, which will tack on a 6 month cookie for the same click through the same source/channel. This, though, is the typical cookie length for an advertiser like us. -The only thing cookies will track (at least for advertising agencies) are search queries & websites that our ads show up on; nothing at all personal about the individual in question. There is nothing revealing, whatsoever. I can't tell you how many fucking times my display ads have shown up for the domain name mail.google.com (or whatever it is) with ZERO other information available. If you see an ad showing up on a number of websites, the cookie that is tracking you is from either Google, or Facebook, or another website that you sign into & YOU allow tracking of. -Google, for as much as people like to hate on it, is really not as evil as everyone makes it out to be. They (as well as Bing, Facebook, etc), actually, are the ones who allow companies in the advertising industry to collect information on online searchers, and I can tell you that while they are trying to drive more clicks & thus gather more info all the time, they would never, ever, ever, do anything that might dissuade people to use another more secretive website to find something. Ever since December/January, when they first started initiating the transition to the enhanced campaigns, the message has been about making people feel like they are personally, individually targeted. Yes, some people take to mean they are spying or knowing too much, but that isn't the case. It's about being relevant. If you are watching a television show, and a slew of commercials come on, how many are likely relevant to you & your demographic? Not many, unless you use a recording device that can monitor which commercials you actually sit through instead of skip ahead. Google is trying to do this; they want to only show ads to people that they think they might genuinely be interested in. You will get ads served to you no matter what. By disabling these cookies, all you are doing is ensuring that we will continue to see submissions from people showing "excellent ad placement" and displaying, say, an ad for a Hoveround on thisiswhyyourefat.com when it actually could have been much more relevant to the INDIVIDUAL person on the site at that time.
disabling cookies just breaks ... logins ... Not third-party cookies. Logins use (or at least, they better use) first-party cookies. My understanding of it is when you log in to a website, it uses first-party cookies (cookies from the site that your address bar says) to keep the state. So if my browser says " then "example.com" is allowed to issue cookies. What's not allowed by Mozilla's change is a widget on that page issuing a third-party cookie from a different website such as "trackingwebsite.net". Now, if I actually type in "trackingwebsite.net", then it's free to do whatever there, but then it can't give me cookies from "example.com".
I haven't read up on details, but was hoping someone can
The iPhone has always been the innovative trendy device which inherently appeals to younger crowds which in turn becomes a symbol of youth. As a result mom and dad have picked one up. The iPhone is no longer the only coveted phone of twenty somethings however it's no surprise the older population demonstrates less neuro plasticity. Apple has now found itself actually having market competition and if this year's sales indicate anything its that Apple has to do something new
Back when I was in the Navy, we had a watch rotation setup in our office building. One officer, one senior enlisted, and a Yeoman (I was a yeoman). Well, everyone stole stuff, and I really needed an office chair at home for my computer. So I waited for my turn to be on watch duty. At a certain point in the night, the Officer and Yeoman would get to go to sleep. We were only awakened if there was an emergency. The only one left awake was the senior enlisted person, and they had to remain at their desk and answer any incoming calls. The rest of the building was void of human life until morning. Knowing this, I parked my car around the back of the building and left the trunk slightly opened before starting my watch duty that night. I had selected the perfect chair from a room full of chairs earlier that week. The chairs in that room were not being used, just sitting there collecting dust. That night, I pretended to go to bed, waited for the officer to be in his rack for a little while, then quietly went down the hall, put the chair I wanted on my head upside down, and ran like hell all the way to my car, dropping the chair in the trunk and closing it all in one smooth motion. That chair served me well, and it was quite comfortable...I used it for many years. I was not alone in this sort of thing either. Pretty much everyone I knew in the military, if given the chance, stole from the government. I knew of only one guy unlucky enough to get caught, and the only reason he did get caught was because there was a fire in his building and they had to break into his apartment to make sure the fire had not spread, and someone just happened to spot something with 'property of the US government' stamped on it.
They do, and you have to admire how well they've established themselves. However, years ago (before the advent of smart phones) I was in the market for an mp3 player. Unfortunately for middle-school me, I could not afford the iPod. This meant I had to stick with the cheap alternatives that only lasted a month or two. My beef with Apple is that not only did they kill any appreciable competition, but they created an atmosphere of "Anything but Apple is Crap". Simply because I couldn't afford top dollar, I was relegated to electronic garbage. As you can imagine, 14 y/o me was socially devastated.
Everything in brackets is added by me, but I will stay as neutral as possible] Porn warnings: chain of evidence to the IP address obtaining thickens Gradually, the individual informations around the warning wave for streaming porn from redtube.com begins to form a picture. Not finally clarified, however, is how the rights holder "The Archive AG" has determined the IP addresses of the warned households. A report on the software "gladii 1.1.3" allegedly used by investigation is available, but is barely enlightening. The participants in the warning wave remain silent about this topic. There are many indications now for a procedure that extends into the criminal area and at least suggests computer fraud on a commercial scale. In forums warned people reported findings after crawling their browser histories for Redtube.com visits around the time the warnings suggests the streaming took place. It was noticeable that, immediately before the Redtube visit, a visit on trafficholder.com was listed. From there it went apparently by automatic forwarding to the domain retdube.net. Here is an example [ DON'T CLICK ON THESE IF YOU ARE GERMAN!!! ]: hit.trafficholder.com/transfer.php? 49655.movfile.net/ 49655.retdube.net/ What is going on here? The browser was forwarded from somewhere [another random website that uses trafficholder] to trafficholder.com. There, the script transfer.php was called with the parameter 49655.movfile.net, which redirected the user to that website and from there the user was redirected to 49655.retdube.net. On retdube.net finally was a redirect to the real Redtube.com. There are many indications that this is exemplary documentation for the IP logging used for the warning wave. [Here follows a lenghty explanation what Trafficholder.com is. In short, when you are on a porn site, you might have experienced that you clicked on something and a new tab popped open, but not with what you clicked on, but a totally different site. that is, what Trafficholder.com does. Important in this context is the fact, that they do offer geolocalization] In this case the URL 49655.movfile.net was specifically supplied with traffic from Germany. ["The Archive AG" obtained the rights to the movies on 18th of July 2013.] The domains movfile.net and retdube.net were registered on the 22nd of July 2013 anonymously. The incidents of streaming mentioned in the warnings began two days later, on the 24th of July. The digits on the front of the domain name corresponds to the ID of a Redtube stream mentioned in the warnings. retdube.net acted in this chain as a kind of proxy that was supplied with traffic of unknowing users. On this proxy, we may assume, the "investigators" logged the IP Addresses before they forwarded the traffic to the original Redtube.com page with the stream. In the websites archive archive.org the redirect in the source code of the pages was partially comprehensible until friday afternoon. Meanwhile archive.org has deleted these pages for unknown reasons. If it went down as described, it would mean: The rights owner or their "investigators" have purposefully directed German traffic via Trafficholder to their fake proxy sites, there they collected the IP addresses and then redirected the unsuspecting user to Redtube.com. So they had generated the alleged copyright infringement without the active involvement of the warned user himself. In the manner described, they would have had no way to actually document retrieval of porn streams as evidence [only evidence of the user being redirected by themselves to a webpage that happens to contain a porn stream]. [Here finally follows a "Thank you" for a dedicated reader, who found something very interesting in the Redtube page visits statistics and put it into together in [this diagramm]( It shows how the page visits for the movies peaked once the redirecting was in place. Very important is that the number of additional visits of both pages are the same in absolute numbers, even though before the redirecting one movie was far more popular than the other, so it cannot be explained just by a gain in overall redtube visitors. It also includes the date 18th of July, on which "The Archive AG" bought the rights.
They're not law enforcement, they're private investigators. German law allows for an attorney to send a "Abmahnung" - a letter that is similar to a cease-and-desist letter. Since the attorney is operating as a private party, he cannot impose legal fines. However, he can tack on costs associated with sending the letter. This has been abused in the past, when shady attorneys mass-harvested addresses of people who had (allegedly) committed some kind of copyright infringement, sent out these cease-and-desist letters containing a legalese wall of text and offered to settle the matter if the addressee paid a ridiculous sum of money supposedly incurred by the attorney (think several thousand Euros). It explained that the alternative would be for the recipient to be taken to court, and cited past court cases where people had to pay hundreds of thousands of Euros in fines. The obvious implication was that people had the choice to pay up now or pay vastly more later. The problem here is that this legal instrument might be completely legitimate if an attorney uses it on a case-by-case basis. It might take a lawyer a few hours to research laws and relevant court cases. And if there's some ongoing copyright infringement, then getting the infringement to stop without having to take someone to court, merely at the nominal cost of an attorney researching and sending a legal letter, should be vastly preferable for both sides. Of course, all of the above is assuming that some kind of copyright infringement even took place. In this case, it now looks like the guys who sent out the letters where the same people who committed the copyright infringement in the first place, by forwarding unsuspecting users to streams that were rights-restricted.

Subsets and Splits

No community queries yet

The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.