The white gadget is an 'Airport' wireless router with internal backup disk.
634 posts • joined 3 Aug 2007
The white gadget is an 'Airport' wireless router with internal backup disk.
Which bit of "Apple offers a battery replacement service for all MacBook, MacBook Air, and MacBook Pro notebooks with built-in batteries" do you not understand?
Has? Surely he found it before it was patched. As he is credited with finding it in the Apple document that you link to.
Meanwhile back on Earth, El Reg are going to be reporting astronomical Apple Watch sales in a few weeks, and the Apple money-making machine will be confounding armchair economists once again. You know it's going to happen in your hearts really, don't you.
You get a record of each transaction in Apple Pay. You might get a receipt, which you'll probably throw away, with contact-less card payment.
Sounds a bit like what did for Jason Bourne.
Bent iPhones: never really happened, did it? There's little point in over-engineering a gadget to cater for edge cases where lard-arses stuff it down their pants, or try to kill it in novel ways for the benefit of a few YouTube clicks.
What's wrong with legislating so that privacy is assumed to be the case by default? If websites claim confusion because the user's intents aren't clear, that's tough. Unless DNT is false or absent in the browser's request header, websites should be obliged not to track the user, with punitive measures for failure to comply.
The site operators can easily provide instructions for idiots to permit tracking.
In my opinion, a move like this would be far more useful than being required to plaster silly warnings about cookies on websites. Come on EU, crack the whip!
Settings | Privacy | Contacts
All the apps that have access to iOS contacts are listed there, and may be disabled on a per app basis. It's not 'hidden' and you have to grant permission before an app is allowed access to your contacts.
It's site operators and their affiliates who are predominantly responsible for 'targeted' ads, not ISPs. TLS won't help there.
Yes, there's something to be said for a walled garden.
"vulnerability involving an uninitialized stack pointer"
That's quite a feat. By that, I mean creating such a bug in the first place. I'm not sure how I'd go about doing that in any of my code, even if I wanted to.
Anybody's usage pattern will involve charging the thing up.
My MacBook Pro typically gets charged up daily, perhaps when I have it on my lap in front of the TV. And - by God - have I thanked the designers time and again when a twitchy cat has taken a leap in the direction of the charging port. The MagSafe power connector is a work of genius and does its job perfectly. It clicks into place in a super-ergonomic fashion, and protects the connector from all manner of accidental yanks.
Apple are crazy to ditch this.
I was looking forward to this movie, but I wasn't impressed. Cutesy 1980s voice synths aren't needed in a film like this. Hell, my Sat Nav has a better voice than Chappie. And why does he behave like a scared human, just because he looks humanoid? Daft. HAL he is not.
Sadly, it's too much like District 9 for comfort. With Robocop thrown in. You'll also get reprises of implausible psychopaths with SA accents. Oh, and Sigourney Weaver mutters a few words in a brief cardboard cutout role.
This doesn't bode well for Blomkamp's forthcoming Alien movie. He can do the action stuff, but he's repeating himself, and I sorely hope a decent screenwriter gets drafted in for that project.
I dont get how Apple Pay is more secure than carrying your credit card in your pocket
But you don't just carry the card in your pocket, do you. You get it out and, typically, stick it into a reader where you start typing your PIN. Your PIN can easily be sniffed by someone watching over your shoulder, or putting the card in a compromised reader. Your card/PIN can be cloned and used quite happily in parts of the world where they don't use Chip & PIN yet.
Apple Pay uses secure tokens to ensure that your credentials are never divulged to anyone. Ergo: more secure.
Apple should take some share of responsibility
They do. In return for their tiny cut on the transaction fee, Apple do take on partial liability, so it has been reported.
Actually, the double-slit experiment, which has been around for a very long time, demonstrates quite convincingly that light exhibits both particle and wave-like properties simultaneously.
The interference pattern in this experiment clearly shows wave-like behaviour. But one may also reduce the intensity of light so that the pattern builds up over time, photon by photon, with the resultant impacts being very particle-like.
One way of looking at this is that the photon 'knows' that there are two slits available and - somehow - passes through both simultaneously, interfering with itself to produce a statistical pattern.
Then we're back to the old conundrum of finding out why a particular photon ended up in a particular place (no pun intended). Which is made all the more fascinating that, in Many Worlds, multitudes of possible outcomes actually took place.
Killing in the name of God makes no sense.
Actually, it makes a lot of sense, as it protects and entrenches religion by eradicating competition. Darwinism in action, but at a cultural meme level.
It's a nasty tawdry business. In my book, religion is about as useful to the world as Ebola.
life is about doing the right thing. This has been a core value of our company for a long time.
Examples: A gazillion dollars in receipts is pretty good evidence they're doing the right thing by a lot of customers. Making their operating systems free. NOT selling your personal shit to advertisers when they very easily could. Giving me a new phone because I clumsily dropped the old one in a car park.
You can argue til the cows come home that their products are a) too expensive b) too inflexible c) too dominant, but you're never going to trip them up on the matter of personal privacy. Apple make stuff, and that's how they mostly make their money. You are not the product.
I doubt I'd buy one either, but I don't think I could complain about nightly charging. Most people don't take their watch to bed with them. Yes, I said most, before fingers start twitching.
Assuming for a moment you could buy recent versions of all those applications - which you can't - the reason they are so expensive is because Adobe really love charging their customers, and to date the competition hasn't been that great, which has made it easy for them to get away with it.
The landscape is beginning to change, though. There are some great applications coming out that in some respects are better than Photoshop. For about 5% of Adobe's price. As I mentioned in another recent posting, we need Adobe to have some serious competition.
Super-intelligent trans-organic aliens are probably reading Hawking's message with wry amusement.
No way will they let us monkeys out of our back yard.
And nor should they.
By the time our species is worthy of survival, we won't be humans any more.
Gradually being dragged towards Chip & PIN? In the US, retailers have only 7 months left to upgrade to Chip & PIN. After that, they're exposing themselves to much greater liability for fraudulent purchases.
Samsung's acquisition may be of use in other parts of the world, but it's a dead duck in the US, surely?
Hey, well done. They must have relented and allowed access to three-year-old versions. For a while it was extremely difficult to find that on their website.
Nice of them, isn't it, to let you buy old unsupported stuff. If you bought it a few weeks ago, don't expect to see any patches anytime soon.
As for wanting the latest and greatest, you are stuffed, mate. It's rental all the way for you.
Have you been living on a desert island? Adobe made usage of Photoshop a subscription-only model ages ago. You can't buy Photoshop outright from Adobe any more.
Is that long-life popcorn you've got in the cupboard?
There are a million far easier ways of committing fraud than trying to fool Touch ID using elaborate print-cloning techniques.
No, you don't.
If you wish to enable optional two step verification, you may use another phone or another Apple device to receive a verification code. If you don't have such a thing, don't enable it.
A printed recovery key may also be used if the verification device is unavailable.
But in any case, there are limited circumstances in which it swings into action, as described here. In the main, when making important security changes or setting up new devices with your Apple ID.
No. You can add any old SMS phone to your list of trusted devices. At runtime you can choose which device you'd like to use to receive a verification code.
Interested. Where do the BBC use client-side Java?
It's called the Fractional Reserve Banking System. Unfortunately, the money gets handed to the very rich rather than to Joe Bloggs.
When you borrow from a bank, they mostly lend you money that doesn't actually exist. With the government's permission, they are permitted to effectively print the bulk of it, conjured out of thin air as 'new money'. And yet, they collect back from you all of that new money plus interest. Ker-Ching!
Nice little earner for zero productive work.
Kingsman is a wonderfully over-the-top bit of fun, saw it yesterday. It takes no prisoners – least of all itself.
From the article:
the wave function described in quantum mechanics suggests the cat exists in a superposition of dead/alive states simultaneously
A quick reminder: the wave function is a well defined deterministic function that describes the probabilities of things happening. The 'wave function' of the insurance industry describes very well how many cars will crash on Britain's roads in a given year. What it doesn't do is describe whether or not my car in particular will crash.
And so to the cat and its wave function. In many-worlds there are vast numbers of 'universes' containing virtually identical boxes and cats, some of which are dead, and others that are alive. The observers in a live-cat universe will see a living cat; the observers in a dead cat universe will see a dead cat. This doesn't mean that the cat is both dead and alive at the same time, just that the universe has obliged by giving us - somewhere - all possible outcomes. This strikes me as being a parsimonious and elegant description. No need to come up with the notion of an observer, and the eternal conundrum of why a particular particle decays 'spontaneously' becomes irrelevant.
Photos for OS X has the potential to be a great product. Apple have re-jigged the OS so that RAW processing can now be implemented as a pipeline process, and third-party code can hook into that non-destructively. But I've seen no indications that Photos can make use of this... yet.
1.0 is going to be pretty lame for a lot of users. No brush edits. No lens correction... These things can be done easily, in particular with Yosemite's under-the-hood work, but it's anyone's guess when this will work its way into Photos.
As for Logic Pro X, I don't see any reason why Apple would want to drop that. It had a complete re-write about a year ago, and some significant updates happened a couple of weeks ago. It's more in line with other Apple products than, say, Aperture.
In answer to the above question, Photos supports multiple local libraries, and it's up to you to decide which you'd like to sync to iCloud. Use of iCloud is optional.
Maybe someone found one of David Cameron's lovely back doors already.
I would just like to mention that my real name is Fuk Yu.
Can anyone remind me whether cryptography is one of those problem classes?
Yes, it is. Google Shor's Algorithm.
"As a reminder, Verizon never shares customer information with third parties as part of our advertising programs."
Here's another reminder: Making unique customer IDs available to world + dog every time the user makes a web request anywhere on the web most certainly is sharing customer information with third parties. Get it?
No, they mean "leveraging".
Look it up. It's in the dictionary.
This would have been quite a good movie, but the CGI special effects were terrible. I mean, Alec Baldwin was being played by a puppet, for Christ's sake! Did they seriously think the audience wouldn't spot that?
Can't fault the historical accuracy, though.