Re: Who cares?
And yet despite this notable handicap, they're all doing considerably well for themselves.
376 posts • joined 6 May 2011
And yet despite this notable handicap, they're all doing considerably well for themselves.
I'd gladly write "God hates fags" on a cake if cake writing was my job; it's just a fucking CAKE, not a binding endorsement of someone's ideology.
I'd suggest that if you don't want to write things on cakes that you don't agree with to get out of the writing-on-cakes business or only offer a set selection of generic wishes.
PS: Please don't bring up UK law when arguing on this matter; those laws haven't applied here since July 4th, 1776.
After all, [the United States' Constitution] didn't say: "all men are created equal, but some more equal than others" last time I looked
A lot of people confuse the Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution but the line you referred to exists only in the former, not the latter. The Fourteenth Amendment does codify the "all men are created equal" sentiment with the guarantee that all people have "the equal protection of the laws."
Comment: As someone who lives and works in Indiana, for as long as I have lived here there has not been, nor is there now, any discrimination based on religion in this State - unless you count the overwhelming levels of casual prejudice against Muslims, which they (they being the legislators who wrote and passed this law) don't. This law was crafted for the singular purpose of letting bigoted Christians discriminate against whomever they pleased (you know, like Jesus did), especially homosexuals, without having to deal with the legal consequences. I'd say that its an embarrassment to our State, but at one time our Governor was the Grand Dragon of the KKK who basically raped a girl to death. (And we were a Union state in the Civil War!)
The Palo Alto Networks senior engineer says legitimate Google Play apps can establish a kind of beachhead on devices that can be invaded by a second app installed from legitimate third party stores like Amazon.
The above quoted line from the article incorrectly asserts that this vulnerability affects the Google Play app store where as the actual report says:
[Android Installer Hijacking] only affects applications downloaded from third-party app stores.
and goes on to explain that this is because:
Google Play downloads Android packages (APKs) to a protected space of the file system. Third party app stores and mobile advertisement libraries usually download APK files to unprotected local storage (e.g. /sdcard/) and install the APK files directly.
[...] bypassed the sandbox to perform remote code execution on an OS X Mac.
At what privilege level? I ask because the description of all the other exploits includes this info.
Pretending that it's something you would wear at the shops [...]
To be absolutely clear, wearing one's Google Glass in shops (well, everywhere really) was explicitly part of Google's own marketing material. Like they showed in the very first video for Glass (specifically around the 1min mark for wearing it in shops.)
I don't think the government should be able to casually satisfy their curiosity about my acquaintances just because I took a trip and came home. If I am a known or suspected threat, drug dealer, or whatever, then they can detain me and get a warrant to search the phone. Besides, they can get the same information by subpoenaing my phone records (or in my case as an American the NSA already has them) and they don't need your phone to do that, only your phone number.
A visitor to a country is different than a citizen returning (which was the case here) so different rules may apply, though I personally don't think their phones should be subject to warrantless searches either for pretty much the same reasons.
What could possibly be on a smart-phone that a border agent needs to see? What's the scenario for which the only protection is searching a person's phone?
This is a serious question; I'm drawing a complete blank as to why a border agent would ever, under any circumstances, need to look at my phone's contents.
the new Mac suite [provides] better integration with the OneDrive and SharePoint.
Well that's just super. Say, did anyone remember to fix any of the numerous cross-platform issues with Office for Windows? Are PowerPoint fonts and embedded media working yet? Change Tracking in Word?
why on earth is my current employer a MANDATORY question?
Did it not occur to you to just lie?
So, you're saying that we were definitely not created by a God(ess) or some other deity?
I don't think our Great boffins know that much of the universe to say 'we definitely arrived by chance'.
Why does the universe need a creator but the creator doesn't?
Siri et al. record and transmit your voice only when you're actively using that feature.
The Samsung TVs record and transmit your voice *continuously.* Ostensibly this to detect and respond to your commands but that also means it potentially records and transmits *everything* you say outloud while in range of the thing to a 3rd party whether you wanted it to or not.
They also do it unencrypted which means that anyone poking around your Internet connection now has a free microphone right there in your house.
Why does a scripting language need threading?
Because if you look at your feet, you'll want to buy new shoes. And we all know how well that worked out for the people of Brontitall.
Godzilla, Mechagodzilla, and Godzuki?
In case you were too busy to read it, here's my summary of Commissioner Pai's 6 objections to the proposed rules:
1. The plan includes possible rate regulation.
2. It prevents per-unit charges for service, transfer caps, and other ways to monetize the end user.
3. Lets the FCC make ISPs do things they might not want to do.
4. Lawyers still exist and these rules don't stop them from maybe taking the ISP's money[*].
5. ISPs will have to file more paperwork and can't do whatever they want to "just because."
6. Taxes still exist and new ones might be applied to ISPs.
[*] Because up until now lawyers have shown so much restraint.
Here's how French ISPs can milk this program:
Step 1. Register a bunch of domain names all over the world.
Step 2. Put "terrorism material" on websites at those domains.
Step 3. Report the sites to the French Government and wait for the ban order.
Step 4. Cash the check for your "expenses."
The satellite, originally called "Triana", was a project begun in 1998 to provide a stream of images of the Earth from L1 (Lagrangian Point #1), as proposed by then Vice President Al Gore. Before it it could be launched, Mr. Gore lost the 2000 election and the incoming Republican majority scoffed at the idea, referring to it mockingly as "GoreSat"; the project was mothballed.
Then in 2009 they pulled it back out, added some new instruments, and rechristened it "DSCOVR." Now it will produce both the images of Earth as well as monitoring space weather for CMEs. (see also: http://www.npr.org/2015/02/06/383618359/satellite-set-to-stream-daily-images-of-earth-from-space)
To a greater extent than your standard apartment/house/flat long term rental the hotel retains significant rights including letting the police in.
Stoner v. California disagrees - the hotel cannot let the police in to search your room without a warrant or exigent circumstances/probable cause.
Do you actually need a warrant in this case?
The 4th amendment protects your person, your home, and your "papers and effects" against unreasonable search and seizure. When you are renting (even transiently) the rental location becomes your "home" for such purposes.
It's hard to say if the FBI acted correctly here; I suspect that they did, though it's a bit shady. From what I gather, they basically put a guy in there as an "undercover" agent to see if they could witness anything illegal going on. But what exactly did the agent pretending to be the repair guy *do*? Did he access the alleged criminal's computers in any way, especially without express consent? Sending the agent in to witness any "plain sight" crime is one thing - to get him or her in the room so as to poke around on the computers to find evidence? Sorry, you can't do that without a warrant.
given how worthless the bluetooth functionality appears to be
Doubly so given that water is a relatively good absorber of 2.4Ghz frequencies and the metal skin of the washer probably makes a very lovely Faraday cage.
A spokesman for the NFL told El Reg: "We’ve looked into this vulnerability and it’s been addressed. We continuously monitor and evaluate our systems for any security issues and remediate them as quickly as possible."
So did the definition of "continually" change from "without cessation" to "only when we're caught" and I missed it? Because if they were *continually* monitoring their systems for security issues then they should have stopped these first-year coding mistakes before the app went live. Or else they knew about the issues and didn't care. In either case, they look like idiots.
One could presume that they use some sort of replay attack prevention mechanism. They do claim to transmit it "securely" which surely would include such protections.
To be clear, the monitoring program is optional.
In exchange for allowing your insurance company to openly spy on you, you get a discount on said insurance. That is, as long as you obey the rules in the monitoring agreement. I'm sure if you speed a lot or do something else they don't like they'll jack your rates right back up.
The phrase "double-digit" when referring to percentages is so broad a range (10-99%) as to be utterly useless as a measure of anything. It's like using the phrase "somewhere in the atmosphere" as a measure of altitude.
If he had simply sold it to the feds \ NASA \ other corrupt power hungry organisations then he would be doing the community a disservice.
Unless we're trying to hack the aliens' WiFi, it seems highly unlikely that the National Aeronautics and Space Administration would ever need something like this.
And I'm sure the National Security Agency *already* knows your WPA PSK.
[...] the time need to crack communications had effectively trebled over recent months.
I think that's a bass-less statement.
What if ISPs responded to a Title II declaration by raising prices across the board and blame it on increased administrative costs?
What makes you think they won't raise their prices regardless? The price I pay for my cable modem connection has more than doubled in the last 10 years (~$20/mo -> ~$45) but the bandwidth I get only went up by ~60% (15Mbps -> 24Mbps.)
For the outer design, the Navy plumped for a shark-like shape, for reasons known only to itself.
I'd imagine that sharks probably go fairly unmolested in the seas, what with the teeth and all. So I'll wager that they're trying to deter people and animals from messing with the thing during missions.
The RPM has to be constant (obvious).
Well no, it doesn't *have* to be. Disks can either be CLV (Constant Linear Velocity) or CAV (Constant Angular Velocity.) In the former, the disk's rotation rate slows as the read/write head moves towards the outside of the platter. I doubt this would work very well in drives with more than one platter, which is probably why nobody does it anymore (AFAIK.) CAV is likely to be a lot cheaper too.
Seems like there should be some way to have a centrifugal blower to separate out the heavier metal dust from the incoming air stream. Then you wouldn't have to worry about anything becoming clogged as you could simply redirect the unwanted particles outside the box.
1. Putting a banner ad *above* the masthead pushes everything down which combined with the large "featured story" graphic crowds the top of the page making it look like there is less content.
2. Having the three-column article list with the same background color as the main page body makes it look squeezed for some reason, like its narrower than it was before. Probably an optical illusion (or a lack of one.)
3. I liked Blue and Red for "alink" and "vlink" way better than Black and Grey.
Edit: 4. I agree with Michael Shelby's earlier comment about the nav bar on each article - you're blocking several lines of the article I'm trying to read with that thing!
Other than that, seems OK.
The argument is not that we haven't landed things on the Moon, but that we haven't landed people on the Moon.
Ah, but if one accepts the idea that humans could get *something* up to the moon, then there's no reason that that something *can't* be a person and their laser reflector. (Note that we can assert this without having to allow for the person to return to earth since the conspiracy claim is only that people have not walked on the moon, saying nothing of their survival afterward.)
prove humans walked on the Moon in 1969
That one's easy - we can shoot high powered lasers at the reflectors they left there and detect the return beam.
Unless, of course, the lasers are in on the conspiracy!
I think Uber fails to "get" the laws in the locations where they operate so now they "get" to be sued.
If you realize that Bill Murray's character is the Buddha, it all makes perfect sense.
as the human moves her arm, the wireless reflection[s] [...] interfere with the direct signal from the Wi-Fi transmitter. This results in peaks and troughs in the amplitude of the received signals
So basically they've reinvented the theremin?
Surely it should be upto the consumer how they prioritise their bandwidth?
Piffle! I'm pretty sure giant faceless multinational corporations know better than *you* what you want.
In all seriousness though, I have been making this argument for a while myself. It's no good to let Comcast and/or Google decide how fast I can stream from Netflix - it should be *my* decision. Give me XXMbps and let me carve it up however I please, with the default being equal priority for all sources.
The reason they don't do this already is that there's no way to make money from it. If you give control to the ISPs, they can charge both you (the end-user) and also stick it to Netflix (et al.) who currently get a "free ride" (from the ISP's point of view.) Though it's not like this was a surprise or something invented by OTT services; the Internet has always (RFC 791 not withstanding) treated traffic equally. You knew what you were getting into when you signed up all those thousands of customers with promises of fast connections and streaming video. It's a bit like joining a conservative political party and then complaining they're not liberal enough.
The electric company doesnt prioritise my TV over my kettle for me.
It does, however, meter your usage where-as ISPs generally do not. So you self prioritize or end up with a large electric bill. I suspect if we end up keeping Net Neutrality then we'll start to see metered Internet as a result.
Bisquick is brand name for a homogenized baking mix containing primarily flour, leavening, and fat. I don't know if there's a British equivalent so here's a recipe to make your own.
[Indie musicians] must also vow never to sue a UGC uploader of their own material. In other words, Google was saying: we'll have your music whether you sign this or not.
I'm not a lawyer, but I'm pretty sure you can't be held to the terms of a contract you don't sign. Perhaps you meant "[...] we'll have your music whether you upload it or someone else does?"
This windmill study is looking for something, didn't find it, and then made conclusions; which is trying to prove something via a negative result. Their conclusion is therefore an inference, and might be wrong for any number of unknown reasons.
If I told you there was a massive hoard of ravenous 30-foot tall flesh-eating purple monsters outside your house and you looked out a window and saw that there were no such monsters, would you then be unable to prove I was lying via a negative result?
I suspect that in the USA, new payment methods are being tried because judging by previous comments above, they are stuck in the past.
For most it's a case of "if it isn't broken, don't fix it." It takes almost no effort to get out my credit card and swipe it through a mag-stripe reader. NFC or QR codes add another layer of complexity, provide no apparent additional benefit, and reduce legal protections.
So not so much stuck in the past as unimpressed with the available upgrade options.
Nope, photo/video manipulation and drunken tweeting might be an explanation if only one person or a small to largish group had done it but the multiple petabytes of photos, video, and text that would be recorded should an event of that magnitude occur would be impossible to ignore or explain away.
Apparently the equivalent of Arbor day in England is called "National Tree Week" if Wikipedia is to be believed.
For example, there was this exchange very near then end that seems cut short:
Clara: "How will they explain this tomorrow?"
Doctor: "You'll all forget it ever happened."
Clara: "We're not going to forget an overnight forest!"
Doctor: "You forgot the last time. You remembered the fear and you put it into fairy stories. The Human superpower -- Forgetting. If you remembered how things felt you'd have stopped having wars and stopped having babies."
At this point in the "BBC America" broadcast it cuts away to a shot of the Earth, right before Clara presumably says "That is the dumbest thing I have ever heard. You do know that humans have cameras, like fucking everywhere, yeah? Like in this very episode you literally saw children taking pictures with the cameras in their phones. Are you saying tomorrow we'll all wake up and say 'Why do I have so many damn pictures of trees on my phone? I sure made a lot of crazy Twitter posts with #overnight-forest-WTF?!' and we'll all just push delete and go about our business? Or ignore the fact that some kid didn't mass-call every phone on the planet? 'Say, did you get a weird phone call from some British kid about not hurting trees? Meh, must have been a wrong number!' Or will people just think it was some crazy Arbor day stunt? And furthermore, wouldn't extra oxygen just make *everything* burn worse? Shouldn't it have been the reverse, pumping as much CO2 into the sky as we can? And where are these glowy life-force tree-growing things when it comes to climate change, huh? Why don't they make the trees fix that shit for us? And why save humans at all? We're *terrible* for the environment, just the worst! You'd think that they'd try and kill us instead. Actually if that were the case your stupid speech about fearing the forest would actually make sense because teaching your children to fear something that is actively trying to kill them is entirely appropriate."
Can anyone confirm?
The moment you add goals or scoring metrics to a simulator, that is gamification.
If I'm in an aircraft simulator learning to operate all the controls, there's the obvious goal of "not crashing the plane" among others and there are scoring metrics dealing with whether or not I make the right choices when adjusting or setting controls.
How is that a game?
While "explorer.exe" is the default GUI, you can use something else by changing the value for "Shell" in the registry key HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\WindowsNT\CurrentVersion\Winlogon to some other executable.
That said, I'm not aware of any serious replacement GUIs for Windows, though I've setup Kiosk style systems using a custom MMC console before.
Just stick a $15 USB to Bluetooth adapter in there and you're done.