@Rik Myslewski - "peak Apple" retraction
Why should they retract it? Either they will eventually be right, or The Reg will disappear before they're right. Either way, no need to take it back :)
3576 posts • joined 12 Feb 2011
Why should they retract it? Either they will eventually be right, or The Reg will disappear before they're right. Either way, no need to take it back :)
Sorry, you misunderstand how must carry works. Must carry forces cable companies to carry channels only if they are freely offered - no cost and no strings attached. The minute they charge for carriage (and all the major network affiliates now do, because the networks now charge them for the programming they provide) they are freed from must carry.
Additionally, most ABC affiliates are independent, and not owned by ABC. So Disney can't bundle your local ABC station with ESPN. The bundling Disney does is simply to lump ESPN in with the Disney channels and other channels they own like ABC Family. The only leverage Disney has here is to say "take all our channels, or you get none of them". Sure, half the subscribers might say "that's fine, I don't care about either channel, but for a big cable company with millions of subscribers, that's millions of customers fleeing because they consider not having ESPN a deal-breaker and to a lesser extent parents wanting Disney channel for their kids.
If you don't understand why Russia (or China or Iran) would have a great deal of interest in the schedule of the President of the United States, you're an utter fool. You personally may have no interest in it, but that's among the list of reasons why you didn't try to hack his email.
This makes it different from every other wearable so far how, exactly? There's the fitness bands for fitness geeks, Apple Watch for fashion geeks, Android wear / Samsung gear for unfashionable geeks, and Google Glass for self centered ubergeeks.
Because automated password guessing attacks probably account for 0.1% of successful hacks, as opposed to the large majority of hacks that have nothing to do with whether you have a great or terrible password, and the remaining minority of hacks where your encrypted password (along with that of thousands/millions of others) are stolen and subject to leisurely dictionary attacks.
The reason we've been able to move off the gold standard to fiat money standards is because of the power to tax. If there were no taxes, why would you need dollars or pounds or other government backed money? You could barter, use bitcoins, gold, or balls of fluff from your belly button to pay someone for something - whatever they are willing to take.
While I'm sure that appeals to die hard Randists, the economy loses a lot of its efficiency when everyone doesn't agree on a common medium of exchange.
Just because we don't have a cost effective way for astronauts to service the JW now, doesn't mean there won't be a way a couple decades down the road. Presumably it is being designed for a long service life, and technology will advance during that time. Would have been nice if it could take advantage of a mid life kicker...
I imagine that's easy to say until you are one of those who is hit and you have a choice between paying a modest sum or losing your entire business.
Most people in the west would argue no random payments when discussing ISIS kidnappings, but if it was your wife or your son they held you may be willing to pay whatever they ask and screw the consequences for whoever they might kidnap in the future.
Magma can't flow for hundreds of miles. If a supervolcano blows, it is explosive like Krakatoa was. It would release many cubic miles of ash, so more of it would settle near the volcano, less the further east (following the jet stream etc.) I recall suggestions of maybe a foot of ash here in the midwest, maybe that will be upgraded if the reservoir is bigger. Kind of a downer for agriculture, I would imagine.
The good news is that the rest of the world would share in the bounty, as enough ash to at least cover your car in a nice layer would settle in Europe, and block a good portion of sunlight for years worldwide. Ice fairs like in the 1600s could return to the Thames - probably year round.
Hawaii isn't a Supervolcano, just a regular one. No chance it will go boom Krakatoa style, it'll just keep doing what it has been doing for thousands of years and adding more valuable real estate in a desirable zip code.
You don't give any data to Apple, the credit card number resides on your phone only, and they don't gather any data on purchases. Nor does it cost you anything, the 0.15% comes from the bank (part of what they get from the retailer)
But I agree with you that bonking a phone is no improvement at all over bonking a card. For that matter the only reason bonking a card is an improvement over swiping a card is because swiping gives the retailer your actual credit card number, which is subject to theft/fraud, rather than a one time code as chipped cards and Apple Pay do. If not for that I'd much rather swipe since the "N" in NFC isn't as near as it should be if fraudsters use a directional antenna and skim cards in your wallet as you walk by.
Version 2.0 probably won't be cheaper than 1.0. Luxottica's margins make even Apple envious!
A week ago the rumor was that approval was imminent. Both can't be true, and I see no reason to give this one any more credence than the other.
You mean it is what Google should have built in to Android if they had half a brain. Instead they've given all that juicy data collection to Facebook.
Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus stated a few days ago that the F35 would be the last manned fighter jet the Navy would ever buy, that unmanned is the future.
I'm sure the Air Force would disagree if asked today, but economics will force them to that conclusion down the road. Congress won't pay for another manned fighter jet program after the F35 because the US Air Force would be the only customer in the world for it, making it cost too much.
TSMC go under? They are by several times the largest foundry/fab operation in the world, by comparison Samsung and Intel are as children. They can get along just fine if Apple never gives them a penny.
You've been able to fit a PDP11 in less than 1 sq mm for a decade...
There may not be a lot of customers for 10nm, but they are high volume high revenue customers like Apple, ATI(AMD), Nvidia, and Qualcomm.
The rumors that showed Apple switching most of their production back to Samsung this fall for the A9 using Samsung's 14nm process showed them switching again and using a 10nm process for the A10 in fall 2016. That must be TSMC, unless the long-rumored deal with Intel finally comes to pass.
That link is titled Linux kernel vulnerabilities and shows a bunch of Chrome vulnerabilities. So you're wrong there.
Also, most of the rest is driver related. An Infiniband exploit is not a kernel vulnerability, the only way that module can run is if that hardware is installed and the driver is loaded.
Stating it again doesn't make it so. Like I pointed out last you made this ignorant comment, actually read what you post. Look at the 2015 link, and notice how many of those vulnerabilities involve Chrome. Unless you are braindead enough to believe Chrome is part of the kernel, you will realize your lie has been exposed.
The Linux kernel has had a tiny handful of vulnerabilities in its whole life. That a few brain damaged "security" sites claim all vulnerabilities for software that comes bundled in a Linux distro is a vulnerability in the "Linux kernel" shows how ignorant people who post on the Reg come to ignorant incorrect conclusions.
If Windows shipped with as much software as a typical Linux distribution did, it would have a lot more vulnerabilities. Vulnerabilities in Office don't count against Windows, but vulnerabilities in LibreOffice are counted against Linux since all distros ship with it. And a few dumb security sites unworthy of the name claim those to be vulnerabilities in the Linux kernel.
Also, many sites separately count vulnerabilities in Red Hat, Fedora, Ubuntu, etc. so one Linux vulnerability counts against it a bunch of times. But somehow the same 'courtesy' isn't extended to Windows Vista, 7, 8, 8.1, Server 2008, Server 2013 and so forth when a single vulnerability affects them all.
It is ironic that this guy makes the claim Windows has fewer vulnerabilities while I'm currently updating my Windows VM that was last updated Feb. 28th and I see around a dozen "Security Update" listed - and I'm not even sure this includes April since the image is corporate managed and may not have pushed out the April updates yet!
I suppose the EU can claim whatever power they want and prevent a company from doing business in the EU if they refuse to comply. I agree that Google is guilty of what they say, but if they try to enforce that 10% fine I hope Google says a big F.U. to the EU and stops doing business there in lieu of paying the fine. Let's see how EU businesses like it when search results stop showing them.
They can hope for an EU search engine to spring up to compete with them, but that won't happen overnight, nor will EU citizens immediately get used to going to www.findit.com or whatever instead of google.com. Probably what would happen is people wanting to search for stuff in the EU would be forced to Bing it, and Microsoft would end up with nearly 100% of the EU search market within five years...
So if a company has the ability to pay, the fine is not ridiculous? That's pretty much saying the more successful a company is (therefore the better their ability to pay) the more they should be fined. Is that really something you support? Seriously?
The FTC takes a much more laissez-faire approach to monopolies, for better or worse. They didn't do much about Microsoft, and one can argue they were proven right as mobile devices broke their monopoly. However that's almost completely due to missteps on Microsoft's part; had they been smarter about their strategies Windows Phone and Android would have their market positions reversed and their monopoly would be stronger than ever. They'd be able to leverage that dominant mobile share to help Bing's fortunes as well.
Google's monopoly will only get stronger until there is a market disruption. You can either hope one occurs naturally, or an external force like the EU can apply it. I think the 10% revenue fine thing they claim to have the power for ridiculous, but even if that was off the table there are ways they could enforce this. Good thing someone is watching out for consumers, the US government only watches out for those with enough money to pay lobbyists and funnel money into election coffers.
I have a feeling they'll approve some new electronic voting machine that will be similarly insecure, after the vendor has funneled millions into the state congress/governor's campaign coffers. No different than a company getting their speed cameras in, or getting their books in schools, it is all about bribing the right public officials.
While voting machines you control the outcome of sound like a better idea at first glance, you risk life in prison if you're caught. Legalized bribes in the form of campaign contributions not only don't risk jail, but you get invited to a lot of parties and the result is the same either way.
Removing the SD slot doesn't change Samsung's position at all, unless they removed the code that understands vFAT, which is unlikely since it will still be used in other ways.
Anyway, Microsoft claims around 200 (!) patents that apply to Android, the vFAT thing is just the one that everyone always talks about but you don't really think Microsoft could shake down Android OEMs for $5 a phone or whatever they're getting based on that single patent, do you? They would have simply dropped vFAT support years ago after Microsoft came knocking and had the SD card use ext3 - tell people to download a driver onto their PC if they need to remove the card from their phone and read it there.
They may still produce a version for 7.x, after all they did a new rev of 6.x for the 3gs to plug a security issue last year. Obviously they will prioritize the newest version of iOS first since it affects many more people.
However, this really isn't a big issue for iOS. Making you download a file other than the one you thought you were downloading is not as much of a problem in a sandbox. They can't make you download an executable since those must be signed to run. Maybe they could use it to get you to download a developer profile and then trick you into visiting a dodgy app store, but that's a bit of a stretch. This type of thing would be much more of a problem on an unrestricted OS like OS X (or Windows or Android)
Why would an SoC be any more limited in RAM than a socketed CPU? If you use the same number of I/Os for DRAM, the max capacity will be identical. I'm not talking about a SoC that includes RAM on chip, that's not practical except for non-embedded use.
Get rid of it. No reason the southbridge shouldn't be integrated into the CPU and make it an SoC. There are no longer any high power parallel I/Os, so there's no reason it should be a separate chip. Intel already revs the southbridge at the same pace they rev the CPUs, time to make the x86 an SoC.
And it was the NEXT article I read after I wrote a comment on another article about the reason I read the Reg was because they didn't regurgitate press releases without comment like half the IT sites. Yes, I used that very word! Hopefully this isn't a new trend, or I'll have to find another IT site :)
I guess you haven't read the Reg's byline - "biting the hand that feeds IT"? It isn't like they only go after Apple, they go after them all. Maybe the "idiot tax" thing is more biting than how they describe Google, but that's just because they haven't thought of anything worse for them. Yet.
When they figure it out, and get tired of the "idiot tax" and move on to the next it'll be the Google fanboys getting all butt hurt over the name calling and thinking the Reg is favoring Apple.
The bylines and clever turns of phrase in the articles are why I read the Reg. They still deliver the IT news, but they don't regurgitate press releases without comment like half the sites, and don't pander to them and kiss ass to their advertisers like most of the rest.
Were you not here for the first hundred times they used that same phrasing?
However, here's the use case for a smartwatch, or at least something wearable that includes an RFID with enough range that it can automatically unlock your phone your presence but it instantly locks if it moves more than a couple meters away from you.
To prevent theft of the phone and wearable item together, the wearable should break the pairing relationship if removed. Ideally the watch can be programmed to 'recognize your wrist', perhaps via chemical secretions in your sweat and the pattern of your pulse at rest, then it can be re-paired with your watch once it is put back while making it and the phone valueless to thieves and coercion useless (no way to reach rest pulse under coercion)
Apple would have been very interested if they had this option when they were dropping Google Maps. Not sure why Uber would be interested, since their drivers can use whatever maps they have/want.
China doesn't hold an IOU from the US, they hold treasury bills and corporate bonds. You can't demand immediate payment on that any more than your bank can call you up and demand you pay off the full amount of your mortgage tomorrow.
The only leverage China has is to quit buying more bonds and other US assets in the future, and over the years as the bonds mature they will hold less and less. They aren't the only market interested in US debt, so while it might raise interest rates a bit, it isn't going to be the end of the world for the US as some people seem to think.
China would have to do something with the money they would otherwise hold in US dollars. Are they going to hold Euros? Doesn't sound too smart to me until they get their Greek house in order. Are they going to hold pounds? There aren't enough pounds in circulation for that. Are they going to hold gold? Same problem. I suppose they could waste their excess money building megacities where no one lives and other malinvestment...oh wait, they're already doing that or else they'd have even more money they needed to do something with!
Yes, I believe all or at least most states have domains like state.il.us and some have city domains below those. I've never seen them used anywhere outside of government and primary/secondary school websites.
Johnny come latelys were upset that all the good domains, like johnnycomelately.com, were already taken.
It is kind of a problem that I can start a business called Bob's Burgers, for instance, and so long as there isn't one in town or the next few towns over, or a chain elsewhere in the state, I have no problem. Having only .com makes it so there can be only one bobsburgers.com, and everyone else has to do weird stuff like theoriginalbobsburgers.com, bobsburgerschicago.com and so forth. The real problem was that while countries like the UK used the .co.uk domain as intended, no one in the US used .co.us and everyone wanted .com in the rest of the world.
New TLDs aren't a fix for this though, if there was a .burgers domain there's still only one bobs.burgers. Domain names are unfortunately just not a good solution on the scale we use them today, which is why search engines become so popular. I don't blindly type bobsburgers.com and hope it is the right one. I google "bobs burgers chicago" or "bobs burgers glasgow" and even if it is called bobspizzaburgersandhummus.com I'll find it. ICANN and registrars refuse to admit that the domain name system has been irrelevant for the past decade.
Even if it stops the normal reboot process, you can force a reset by holding down the home and sleep/wake buttons together for 10 or 20 seconds. Undoing the proxy might require putting it into airplane mode first (or get away from the rogue wifi network)
Of course anyone dumb enough to fall for changing their proxy settings when iOS amply warns you about it isn't going to know any of the above. They would have similar issues with any phone, especially one that is more configurable like Android, if they're willing to change any system settings just because someone says they should...this is why dumb people shouldn't be allowed to have nice things!
If CSIRO sold products to consumers that might be a problem, but they don't. If they start doing so and include this logo on their products, Cisco might have an actionable reason to come back to court and revisit this.
How many different phones called Galaxy did Samsung release, from the Note to Sn versions that each had many variations, along with low end crap like the Ace? They did that successfully for years, so their recent difficulties certainly can't be blamed on it.
Apple reports sales, not shipments. When an OEM ships phones to carriers and stores that don't sell, the unsold ones are eventually returned. That mucks up the numbers for unpopular phones no one wants. That's not true of either Apple or Xiaomi, unless you think EE bought millions of iPhones they couldn't sell and ended up returning them to Apple or putting them in a landfill.
When Apple reports their sales, profit etc. in their quarterly filings they are required by law to be truthful. If they lie there, the executives can be personally sued by investors for making false statements. Such liability could easily be in the billions since it wouldn't take much movement in Apple's stock price if lies were discovered to cost that much.
It is only in the wishful thinking of an Apple hater that Apple's figures aren't real. You hate Apple and the iPhone, don't understand why anyone should buy one, so you assume the numbers must be manufactured.
They just didn't bother with bringing in Guinness and PWC to prove it because they don't care about getting a 'certificate' for setting a world record.
There's a UAC prompt about needing privileges to do something, and that 'something' is disabling UAC :)
And have Windows updates disable the LG monitor software so that it comes up with a warning about it being disabled due to security issues and advising users to contact LG for further information, along with re-enabling UAC. That's the only way companies that screw with basic OS security practices will learn their lesson.
If they have $6 billion in revenue let's assume they sell only iPhones for simplicity (no lower margin products like Macs, iPads, Apps, iTunes tracks etc.) That comes to 10 million phones at $600 each. $250 million profit comes to $25 profit per phone, paying a third of it in taxes.
Australia is unhappy based on Apple's GROSS MARGIN, but if Apple didn't sell anything directly into Australia, but it was all sold through whatever Australia's equivalent of Walmart and Best Buy are, Apple would be selling at wholesale pricing and the retailer would be permitted a small markup and they'd have to profit off that. And guess what, selling a small fast selling item like an iPhone for $600 when you buy them for $550 and have $25 of per unit sales cost is not at all out of line. Companies like Walmart have much thinner margins than that.
Tax treaties specify transfer pricing should be done based on arm length pricing - that is, the wholesale price Apple would charge a retailer that operated in that country. So Australia can whine all they want, but unless they want to tear up tax treaties, or they want to make people believe Apple's wholesale price is significantly lower than that, they don't have a leg to stand on.
If they actually acquire Twitter, and considering the typical acquisition premium, they'd be paying around $45 billion or over $150 per monthly active Twitter user. Can they make that much off them? Even if they don't sling ads via Twitter, being able to gain access to the users' "stream of consciousness" is worth a lot to marketers.
Google should just go ahead and acquire everything related to data collection on the Internet, that way I can bypass a lot of that crap to the extent I'm able to avoid letting Google in my life in any way.
Starting now, for every value of now.
That's why they talk about grid storage rather than a thinner iPhone. Being 1/5th as dense as LiON isn't a problem so long as they can be made 5x cheaper (including environmental impact during production and disposal)
How much does coverage matter, so long as it covers all the important roads and enough of the less important ones? In the US at least, if you look at coverage maps in areas with very sparse coverage you'll see full coverage along all the major interstates and highways. That is probably the case world wide - right of way to lay cable and put up towers is easier in such areas.
The information relayed by cars is going to be about what is going on where your car is going. Accident ahead, black ice ahead, deer seen hanging around the edge of the road ahead, etc. There's no reason to have images from cameras of other cars relayed so bandwidth should not be a concern. The information relayed is post image recognition. This information is useful, but an autonomous car should be driven in a manner where it doesn't REQUIRE this information.
Just like humans are able to drive successfully most of the time without knowing what is ahead beyond that which they can see. Sure there are some accidents that could be prevented if they knew there was a five car pileup just around the fog shrouded bend, so you could avoid becoming the sixth. The system tries to tell your car about it, but maybe it doesn't succeed 100% of the time, and there's an accident. If you spec a bullet proof SEVEN NINES system, think of how many lives will be lost while humans continue to drive as you wait and wait for the 'perfect' solution that targets reducing deaths all the way to zero for Version 1.0?
How about having the details uploaded to mozilla, so they can check the server name against the list of domains registered with one of the major registries to give the user an indication how serious it may be.
If I get a warning from yahoo.com, I may know that is something to be very concerned about (or someone at Yahoo is about to get fired) but the average person doesn't know the difference between that and a warning for myblog.myvanitydomain.com.
I'd be surprised if Skype continues to support VP*, consider who owns it now. Probably Microsoft has their own proprietary compression scheme they'll be pushing along with HEVC.