Re: A small omission?
So, by your definition, anything that is legal by the letter of the law is automatically morally and ethically right as well?
355 posts • joined 15 Feb 2007
So, by your definition, anything that is legal by the letter of the law is automatically morally and ethically right as well?
Moustachio'd rocker Freddie Mercury and HRH The Queen swap places for a day.
What part of "Years of use, which are based on first owners" do you not understand?
Three years is the figure they expect the original purchaser to own it, before selling it.
How can they distinguish between you sending a message and an auto-responder sending a message?
The only way would be to have the device and check which apps / rules are running.
Hell, you could have even dictated a message, so fundamentally there would be no difference to holding a conversation.
"Guccifer is accused of is broadcasting a painted self-portrait by former President George W Bush while naked in a shower and bath"
Naked hacking eh? He wants to watch out he doesn't drop the laptop into the water.
Apart from the mentioned usability issue, they are just too flimsy.
Foot pedals control yaw, and do basically the same thing as a steering wheel in a car or the handlebars on a bike.
So saying "Use your feet to steer by pushing on the left or right pedal" is putting it in simple terms that anyone familiar with cars or bikes (ie everyone) can understand.
The photo says 50, 000, 000 K
Is that not Kelvin?
Draw a graph of atmospheric pressure over altitude. Is the line straight or curved?
It's curved. Ergo, expending all your thrust at launch is not the most efficient way to gain altitude.
According to that graph, at 1km up (Which is how high the vehicle got), there is ~2.3% less pressure than at sea level.
"Using a lower acceleration means that you're wasting impulse lifting the remaining mass of your fuel for a longer time, hence you'll get a lower altitude. Blasting it out all at once means that more of that potential energy stored as pressure is used to push the vehicle alone, getting you to a higher altitude."
If you expend 100% of your fuel in the first 1% of altitude, it means that you have to travel the remaining 99% (Through the least efficient part of the graph) with no power at all, and that you have way less inertia. So expending all the fuel at the start is not all good - there are up-sides and down-sides.
"featherweight record-breaking rocket that is 2.68m tall yet weighs less than 1.5kg"
"The rocket produced 550kg of thrust – enough to lift a small car off the ground – and blasted off to 550km/h in under 0.5 seconds"
I am guessing the 1.5kg weight is without fuel - even so, 0 - 550km/h in 0.5s sounds like way too fast too soon. Wouldn't you be better off distributing that thrust over a longer time? Are they not wasting a lot of DV trying to go too quickly through the atmosphere?
"570 billion times brighter than our sun's output" ...Our sun's output over what time? 1 second? 1 year? its lifetime?
Oh my, that really needs explaining? If you omit such information from a comparison, the assumption is that you are comparing like for like.
The amount it outputs in x seconds is 570 million times more than our sun's output in x seconds.
I fail to see the point in a battery powered aitcraft being able to swap out batteries without turning off.
If you are in a region that is in the process of moving from mag-strip to Chip+PIN, then once you are able to conduct your daily life without the magstrip, then trash the magstrip on your card!!
All the skimmers (AFAIK) clone magstrips. Even if you insert your card into a device that uses C+P, if it has a magstrip skimmer installed, then they have magstrip + PIN, which is enough to withdraw.
While this may have been in jest, this may be a good way to hit back,
If everybody started discussing bomb plots with their mates, browsing Jihadist websites and generally trying to generate as many false positives as possible, they would become overwhelmed and may be forced to dial it back a notch or two.
Getting scammed of a couple of hundred quid, maybe.
If you hand over £1.6m, then frankly you are more of a problem than the scammers. If there weren't twats like this woman around handing out such insane amounts of money, then the incentive wouldn't be as strong for people to become scammers.
Like they did with the USB charging standard?
And then Apple just stuck two fingers up at them and made it so that iDevices *could* charge from USB, but only with a proprietary adapter that does not ship with the product?
Have they even considered how this would work when everyone in the office is doing this at the same time?
It would be way too noisy and you can bet that your PC would occasionally pick up someone else's commands.
If it processes the commands without focusing the app, you may not even know that the sensitive spreadsheet you have on your PC was just emailed to all and sundry because the guy at the desk next to you tried to send an email to all users...
"The Priv looks conventional, but unfolds to reveal a QWERTY keyboard"
This is THE main differentiating feature, and you felt the need to include a whole page of pictures taken using the device, which is probably not a huge concern for the target audience.
Is there one pic of the keyboard though? No. Fail.
The question "Where the hell has my phone gotten to?" becomes a little more problematic when the bugger has legs!
Am I missing something here? As long as you have enough zip ties, no length is too long - you just daisy chain them.
"Ultimately one uses Occam's razor, but the simplicity of one explanation or the other is once again a value judgement that differs acording to personal perspective. I find the idea of a Big Bang simple,. and it has excellent explanatory power. The Creationists found it incomprehensible, whereas the thought of a Divine Being who waved a magic wand and brought a complete world into existence was a lot easier to grasp..."
As long as you don't ask "Where did the creator come from?". Then you realize that the creationist explanation is way more complicated.
"Samsung's phones really were blatant rip-offs of Apple's, down to the grid of icons and the 'dock' at the bottom of the screen"
You mean like just about every OS in the GUI age ? Even Windows Mobile, which pre-dated iOS, worked in this way.
"Even the number of icons in each row was the same"
Four icons in a row is just common sense. You want a power of 2, so that the available number of pixels can be neatly divided up. 8 is too many, 2 is too few.
So no, nothing about what you said is either innovative or non-obvious - there is significant prior art for both of these concepts, and any suggestion that Apple can lay claim to them is ridiculous.
Have faith, brother, it's there.
Wotan told me so in a dream.
The mind truly boggles. Either you are a complete moron or you are trolling. Probably you are American and you expect everyone to know where every road is because back home they are all numbered.
Go look at the A-Z of London, and then ask yourself "If I memorized the entire lot, how long would it take me and how much would I expect to earn per hour for driving people around".
> It seems the Knowledge only extends to main roads beyond the North Circular and this individual had to resort to his A to Z to find the place.
Go look at what the knowledge is: http://www.the-london-taxi.com/london_taxi_knowledge
It's about ROUTES from one area to another - ie how to get around london, not about memorizing the entire map of london. It is also about MAJOR landmarks (Embassies, restaurants, hotels etc) not some poxy B&B in a back street.
> If you are a visitor who doesn't know the area, you are not going to be much help, are you? Which is why you engage a supposed professional guide
Did he get you there?
Presumably he got you from the airport to the general area by memory alone, then had to look up exactly where the side street was.
If you give the junk a nudge, the spacecraft that nudged it would also be in the same orbit as the junk.
To nudge the junk without following it, you would need some way to "fire" it away, but every action has an equal and opposite reaction, so you would still need to expend the same amount of delta-V to correct the orbit of the cleaner ship.
I always wondered if you could use a long cable of something (carbon nanotube?) and attach that to the space junk, then fire the other end of the cable into the earth's atmo, thus aerobraking the junk into the atmo. Maybe some kind of parachute type structure on the end to increase the friction? If the coil and chute were light, you would then minimize the amount of dV required to fire it into the atmo, and also the amount of dV required to correct the orbit of the cleaner ship. Hell, if you attached a little rocket to the chute end of the cable, and didn't fire it until you released the junk, it would mean that the cleaner ship's orbit was not affected at all.
I suppose though, that anything in a lower orbit could get clothes-lined by the cable ;)
How very last century!
What next? Smurf attacks?
Big wad of cash spelling VIP.
Baseball cap no doubt representin' yo homies or team.
All on a flowery sheet and apparently posted on facebook ?!?
Two typos in the first two sentences.
"guilty guilty", "Mx Gox"
Apart from the visual differences, the head tracking is optical as opposed to gyro based.
Gyro based does not come close to the fidelity of optical - for a start gyros only give relative, not absolute tracking.
TL;DR: You are much less likely to vomit over your PC with optical tracking.
Will it run Crysis?
"Some MPs are concerned about this and are worried that metadata retention of all websites they visit will become a permanent state of affairs."
Now that's an idea - An un-erasable, public browser history for all politicians :)
I think they probably mean the video on this page, but I don't think you can stream those, maybe that's why it got omitted.
Also, as this is a mobile platform, there is some merit in the technique used, as it would chew very little in the way of CPU cycles (And thus battery life).
XOR takes two inputs and has one output.
You cannot use it twice and end up with the input.
For an output of 1, it would be impossible to know which of the following inputs were used:
So you would have a 50/50 chance of "guessing" the inputs.
AFAIK, Calling XOR the "Exclusive Operator" is technically incorrect and ambiguous. For example, Exclusive NOR is an "Exclusive Operator", but is not XOR (In fact, it is the exact opposite of XOR).
Operator = The operation (OR, AND, NOT etc)
Exclusive = "If both inputs meet the criteria, invert the result".
Certainly, the sentence "and said it used only XOR (exclusive operator) to safeguard files" implies that XOR is THE "exclusive operator", when it is not, it is ONE OF the exclusive operators.
If you said to an engineer "Use an exclusive operator" when meaning "Use a XOR", then the statement would be ambiguous.
Disclaimer: I am not an expert in this field, so I could be wrong about accepted terminology.
So does Win10 finally add a taskbar for each monitor?
It beggars belief that such a basic usability feature was not included in Win7. Thank god for 7+TT
Except that the windows license is included in the price of the device, so they are not getting it for free at all.
They sort of do?
As in heroin addicts getting methadone?
I am quite surprised they didn't go with SteamOS.
Could you maybe put SteamOS on there instead? I doubt nVidia care that much about the OS to lock it down?
A desktop-class machine in a console form-factor for $200 that runs SteamOS would be a very different proposition methinks.
It in no way guarantees that the object will be printed only one time.
All it does is cost you extra, as you have to print a copy to send (instead of just squirting the schematics down the wire), introduces a margin of error, then it destroys YOUR copy? What use is that for people wanting to sell one-time prints?
If you can attach it to something. Good luck getting it stable unless your camera has RCS.
That's a "Revert to VAB" moment if ever I saw one.
Hats off once again Mr Musk - many companies would see this as negative publicity, but he knows all the geeks just see it as porn.
You need to specify where a device that plugs into your video output is located?
Take a wild guess.
And if the mac only has a displayport adapter, just use a DP -> HDMI converter dongle.
There are systems out there that can detect a machine requesting lots of files over the network and flag it as suspicious.
Also, running in a non-1920x1080p resolution would cause big problems for this hack - most of these game capture boxes pretend to be a 1920x1080p monitor, so you could just check for device change of the monitor, or watch for resolution change.
Also, you would not need a game capture card for many nvidia GPU machines - just record the desktop with Shadowplay.
Which raises more of a security risk IMHO.
Just make ShadowPlay is enabled in "Shadow Mode", wait for the CEO to leave his PC unlocked, then hit the record button and have his last half hour of screen activity dumped to a video.
See the original article for your citation.
Why do you think the class action suit was brought? For exactly this reason.
You seem to forget that it was Apple who were about the only ones enforcing DRM on their hardware up until that point.
The creative players, for example, did not enforce DRM - you could load any old MP3 on there and it would play.
Thousands of iPod owners re-bought their existing collections on iTunes just so they could play the music they already legally owned.
IIRC the first person to make a regular MP3 playable on the iPod was not Apple, but DVD Jon.
"Feel like shit"?
A bit strong.
More like a bit of shaming.
El Reg's proof-reading is very sloppy, pretty much every article has typos or grammatical errors of some kind.
From a publication that would not hesitate to rip the piss out of other organizations for similar transgressions, I call this fair game - how could any self-respecting journalist justify anything less than perfect command of the language they write in on a daily basis?
"The rootkit was in fact a commercial product".
Which illegally used open source code written by Jon Johansen, AKA "DVD Jon", whom they sued for reverse-engineering DeCSS.
But let's not let that get in the way of a good shilling, eh?