Re: Small correction
Wasps are not the kind of bugs they are used to dealing with.
447 posts • joined 2 Jul 2008
Wasps are not the kind of bugs they are used to dealing with.
Agree, the boxes look clumsy, I don't really see what they add; the page looks much cleaner without them. I'm struggling to picture the creatives meeting that came up with that;
"What can we do to change the look of the site?
"We could draw boxes round everything?"
Oops, I meant per week obviously!
I swear that that mistake was not caused by drinking, it's a bit early even for me.
I consider myself to be a moderate drinker, insofar as I never get drunk; however I drink some wine and spirits daily, and I blast past that 14 units level in a couple of days, never mind a week. So what I found interesting in the paper is not where the minimum risk of dementia is, but the comparison between abstention and the amount I actually drink. Looking at fig.2 in the paper, it seems that the outcome for abstainers is on a par with the outcome for people consuming 40+ units per day, and furthermore that comparison seems to tilt further in favour of the drinkers as age increases.
So I can slurp my dinner time cab sauv and my whisky nightcap safe in the knowledge that I'm doing as well as someone who doesn't drink at all. At least as far as dementia risk goes; I'm sure my liver might have something to say about this if it could speak.
That's the problem with this model. In the good old days, between new major versions of windows, things were pretty stable, and you could deal with all the breakages all in one go when a new version dropped. But with the new rolling upgrades model, we are doomed to dealing with ongoing random breakages, without any continuous years of stability.
My tale of woe from the April '18 update was that it broke USB device forwarding in NoMachine. After much head scratching and blaming NoMachine, it turned out that a new (or newly enabled-by-default) Connected Devices Platform Service was now hogging the port that NoMachine uses. Thanks Microsoft.
To be fair, the paper actually is quite definite, the abstract says;
Quantitative analysis of the radar signals shows that this bright feature has high relative dielectric permittivity (>15), matching that of water-bearing materials. We interpret this feature as a stable body of liquid water on Mars..
However it's not as if they jumped to that conclusion, they didn't just see a bright patch on an image and say "yep, that's water". Reading the paper to understand how they reached their conclusions is definitely warranted before criticising those conclusions. I have only skimmed it, but is seems pretty sound to me.
I built a neural network out of NDA molecules ... but I'm afraid I can't talk about it.
i'm not sure that a commercial organization should be allowed to determine what I can and can't run on my device. And as a browser supplier, these organizations are increasingly in a position to determine this.
That seems like a bit of a strange attitude TBH. Your virus checker provider is a commercial organization that determines what you can and can't run on your device, and you're perfectly happy for them to do that (I assume, but feel free to set me straight otherwise). Mozilla/Google removing extensions judged to be malicious from their app stores and official delivery mechanisms is them acting in an equivalent role.
If you're determined to run malware-filled software, you're free to obtain the extensions from outside of the official app stores and sideload them. Google et al aren't controlling what you run on your machine, they are controlling what they distribute through their channels, and I personally don't see the problem with that.
The example given on the Mozilla blog; "Sometimes you’re listening to music in a tab, but you don’t really want that tab taking up space as you browse the web.". Sounds reasonable to an extent, although I can't think of too many other use-cases. And when I'm listening to TuneIn Radio on the desktop, I open it in a separate window and minimize that, hence no unnecessary tab in the window I'm browsing in, so even that use-case is sketchy. But I'm sure more creative minds will think up some ways to use the feature.
Made me think about a droid doing it. Then knowing surely, unless there is a MASSIVE leap in tech, this won't happen in our life time.
If you want to replace a human by a robot, and still do the job the same way the human did it, then that is true for many jobs. However often, you want to do the job a different way in the process of automating it, a way more suited to automation.
With reference to your bin man example, the solution might be an automated vacuum refuse collection system, such as already exists in many places; no bin men, no bin lorries, different way of solving the problem.
So just because humans do a job in a way that is tricky for automation to copy, doesn't mean that job can't be automated.
I suspect a significant proportion of human drivers would crash in that situation, if not the majority; the black car indicates and changes lane normally, and there are no brake lights or signs of trouble on the white car, so it's going to take a moment before you clock that it's not moving. It's less than 2s to impact from the stationary car coming into view by my stopwatch, and the nominal stopping time from 40mph with ABS is 2.0 seconds, so do the math; it's pretty much a guaranteed crash situation.
In fact many human drivers would probably swerve, which on a real highway with lanes full of traffic would likely mean an even worse accident as a nice multi-lane pile-up ensues. The car in the video had slowed quite a bit, as it was only slightly more than a car length late in stopping, so if it was hitting a real car instead of a polystyrene model, it would likely have at least kept the accident in its own lane.
The issue of whether you'd have time time to take over from autopilot in time is a bit moot, if the autopilot actually did as well or better than a human driver would have.
@Wade Burchette - that's what the x86 emulation is for, it's mentioned in the article. With 10 year old applications, it's even possible the performance won't suck too badly.
@Credas - It's a somewhat edible hot burger in 2 minutes without going further than the kitchen, I say my defence stands up. Don't knock it 'till you've tried it.
People will eat any old shit if you present it the right way, how else does anyone explain rustlers microwave burgers?
Okay, I will step up and defend microwave burgers. You do have to make them right; no matter what the instructions say, toast the bun separately, do not under any circumstances put it in the microwave. Fold a paper towel around the meat patty when you cook it, it will soak up the excess moisture released during heating. In the case of Rustlers burgers, throw away the Rustlers sauce, it's disgusting, and apply your proper condiments of choice instead. If we're talking cheeseburger, an extra slice of cheese does not hurt, as the one slice provided is generally lacking in flavour, as well as quantity.
None of this will make it into a gourmet experience, don't get me wrong. But it is actually a passable snack if done right, and in my case, significantly superior to the burgers available from the eastern European guy around the corner, whose food safety standards are distinctly questionable.
@Blockchain commentard - it isn't a conspiracy theory exactly, and Bayliss didn't invent the wind-up radio, his patent was only for a very specific spring arrangement used in his radio, not for the whole concept (although he was more than happy for everyone to attribute the whole idea to him). There are patents going back at least to the 1940's covering the wind-up radio in general. Bayliss' patent was valid, but most of his complaining about IP theft was not, at least as regards his own invention; people moved on to using rechargeable batteries as the energy store in wind-up radios, which meant they did not require his patented spring arrangement, and didn't owe him anything.
Wait ....., sorry ..... I was vaguely remembering the Stainless Steel Rat series. Oh god, I'm getting old.
I never read Bill the Galactic Hero, but the Stainless Steel Rat books were great! Now where can I get a porcuswine burger around here?
That's the thing, though. The movies acts as a great illustration to the book, but without having read the book it's very confusing. I remember it came on telly a day or two after I finished the book, and suddenly everything slotted into place. And you could see which bits had been shuffled around just to shift the narrative along quickly.
Dune is a truly epic tale, and IMHO much too big to fit in a single movie, or even a mini-series. I would love to see it given a full Game of Thrones level TV series treatment, then you might get something worthy of the books. Not likely to happen, but a man can dream.
I read The Expanse in parallel with watching the TV series, and doing that it was really obvious how much you lose even with many hours of serialisation, although I still found the series pretty enjoyable (there was that aspect of it providing a visualisation of key parts of the story). But trying to squeeze an epic tale like Dune down into a single two hour movie, to my mind it just can't work.
.. this is a phone we're talking about, right?
I know handset makers desperate to differentiate their hardware from the competition turn to secondary features such as the cameras to try to make their products stand out; fine. But journalists and reviewers don't have to pander to this kind of nonsense. There may be a few professional and pro-am photographers that choose to use a smartphone as a primary camera, and would care about having significantly above-average camera on their phone, but the vast majority of them are going to use a proper camera. And for everyone else that just wants to take a few holiday snaps that they'll probably never look at, or take a snap of their dinner to put on instagram or whatever, it really doesn't matter, the camera just needs to be ok.
This camera capability competition is little more than a marketing exercise, a way for manufacturers to try to claim bragging rights over their competition when the core product just isn't that exciting. And while I'm happy that it gives bored tech journos something to talk about, it just seems a bit silly to me. Maybe I'm alone, and everybody is going to pile in and tell me how having an amazing camera is their most important criteria in choosing a phone, I guess I'll see.
The only bit of good news in this story is that my contract term was coming to an end so I took the opportunity to mentally note to NEVER sign up with BT again and switched to a different ISP.
Although BT is not high on my list either, I'm not sure they are that much worse than any other big ISP, on the actual ISP front. I think the main lesson you should take away from that experience is do not use the ISP-supplied router. I've also had multiple bad experiences with firmware updates to a BT Business hub causing various problems, resolved only by junking the BT kit and replacing with a third party router. But was it worse than my Virgin Superhub 3 at home? It seems to be standard policy amongst ISPs to foist crappy kit on you, and then make matters worse by forcing sketchy firmware updates on you on their schedule that break things and are difficult to block or roll back. Never again if I can help it.
It'll be the "year of Linux on the desktop" any day now.
If a site can promise that they will only have some banner ads, no autoplaying videos, no third party scripts (potentially malicious) from the ad slinger etc, then I would be happy to white-list their site - there are sites that I do indeed to that with already.
In theory, that's about what you're supposed to get with Adblock Plus with "Allow Acceptable Ads" enabled. I use that setting, unfortunately it doesn't seem to give any stats on that, so I have no idea how many sites actually carry "acceptable ads", or what the ratio of acceptable to non-acceptable ads is (pretty bloody low, I expect).
"Campaign Owners are legally bound to perform on any promise and/or commitment to Contributors (including delivering any Perks).".
That implies to me that there is a legal contract regarding that obligation; I don't think they would use the term "legally bound" if they couldn't back it up. Then this;
By using our Services, you acknowledge that Indiegogo reserves the right to attempt to recover or hold funds from your Campaign, or the connected Stripe or bank account associated with your Campaign, for reasons including but not limited to: refunds, lost chargebacks, a Campaign Owner does not act in accordance with Indiegogo’s Terms, or other situations resulting in negative balances.
We may obtain reimbursement of any amounts owed by a Campaign Owner to Indiegogo by holding funds from your Campaign, or the connected Stripe or bank account associated with your Campaign, or seeking reimbursement from the Campaign Owner by any other lawful means, including by using third-party collections agencies. You authorize us to use any or all of the foregoing methods to seek reimbursement..
I thought it was already well established that endurance, in terms of number of write-cycles is already well in excess of what consumer devices would ever reach (I thought there was an El Reg article on that, can't find it, but see e.g. Grueling endurance test blows away SSD durability fears.
Okay, you can't have too much of a good thing, and maybe these things will find themselves in some enterprise workloads. But all the SSD failures I've seen, which is several, including the 1TB Samsung in my own laptop, have not been because the drive got within a million miles of its rated write cycles, but because they just decided to stop working one day. "Boot device not found". Game over.
So by all means work on the endurance, Samsung, but if you could make it so they don't just keel over and die for no apparent reason as well, that'd be great!
(Note: I'm not saying Samsung has any kind of reliability problem, quite probably their failure rate is good, and we just got unlucky. Just pointing out the obvious, that non-wear-related failures are a thing.)
@onefang - sure, I didn't say the we don't need any more resolution, just that we might not need resolutions so high that our PCs will melt. I mentioned 4k displays at the end of my post, and 8k displays are being demo'd right now with current, albeit high-end PC hardware, e.g. Pimax 8k (some guy's video review), so that doesn't seem too crazy.
The Pixel in a VR headset is a bit lower resolution than the Rift, it's 1080p, so 960x1080 per eye, versus 1080x1200 for the Rift, but it's not too bad.
The biggest problem at the moment is not so much resolution as fill factor; the so-called "screen door effect". You can see individual pixels not so much because the resolution is too low, but because you can see the gaps around the individual pixels. Things don't look blocky as when the resolution is too low, but it looks as if you are looking through a fine mesh. Even just using my Pixel and Daydream headset, not the highest resolution rig, I rarely really feel like resolution is what's lacking.
Now you could solve this simply by throwing pixels at it - the higher the resolution, the finer the "mesh", and if you go fine enough, then it will seem to disappear. This will, as noted, require a great deal of processing power to render all those pixels, however, and seems like a pretty brute force way of dealing with it.
Foveated rendering doesn't sound to me like much better of a solution. The complexity of getting the eye tracking to work well enough and fast enough, the variable-resolution rendering, and the other issues mentioned, sounds like an absolute nightmare.
Now I don't know displays, but I do know a bit about image sensors. Image sensors also suffer from fill factor issues - light falling between the pixels is wasted, thus the sensitivity of the sensor is less than optimal. One common solution to that is micro-lenses - as it sounds, an array of tiny lenses is bonded over the pixels, and the lenses capture light that would have fallen into the dead area around the pixel and focus it onto the active area. I don't see any reason why something similar wouldn't work for displays, and a quick bit of Googling says I'm not the first to think that way. No idea of the practicality or cost of manufacturing that kind of thing, but it may well be that we don't need so many pixels to make VR less crap after all, a 4k display plus micro-diffusers (or whatever those things end up being called) to fix the fill factor may be more than good enough.
There seems to be either a pun-hater, or possibly a vegan, down-voting you guys. Whichever it is, if I find him, I'm not going to mince my words.
Yeah, there's nothing like a dodgy dossier or two to ensure that the right policy decisions are made, eh? When will we learn?
Yes, I'm still trying to get my head raptor-ound the idea that they ever thought this would work.
True, but it was a funny article anyway, in fact I was positively owling with laughter.
Siri/Alexa whatever voice assistant you choose simply passes the request to shazam and waits for the response, so either way this kind of integration is not something you would need to buy the company for.
Except that you don't get the associated data about, for example, what the customer ultimately buys from their Shazams, or where they buy it from, or how they respond to choices presented to them during the process. Remember, in this day and age, it's all about hoovering up all that lovely behavioural data people leave behind.
The speculation I've read elsewhere is that they want to give Siri the ability to recognise songs etc by integrating Shazam. No idea if they will crapify the standalone Shazam app in the process; it shouldn't be necessary, and would probably only drive people to Shazam alternatives more than driving them to use iTunes or whatever, but companies don't always seem to act rationally about these things.
When I first got on the internet, I had a 9600 baud modem, so that 0.68Mbps speed on the slowest street there is still more than seventy times faster than that, if it makes them feel any better. I have 100Mbps now though, and it's pretty sad to think that their 0.68Mbps speed is actually closer to that old 9600 baud modem than it is to my current cable connection.
@ I ain't Spartacus - ACs posts may well be childish, but there is a valid point lurking under there. As long as people don't consider the availability of regular updates as a significant factor influencing their buying choice when purchasing a phone, there is little incentive for manufacturers to change their attitude to providing said updates. And the fact is that the majority of people seem to vote with their wallets to say that regular updates are not a big deal, in fact no few of them explicitly say they'd like less updates. You can hardly blame manufacturers for focusing on things that their customers actually care about.
It's the age old problem - you need compelling content to persuade people to buy the equipment, but nobody wants to spend the money creating content when there isn't an existing user-base to sell it to. Every so often I pull my Daydream View off the shelf, spend an hour or two trying out a few apps from the play store, then usually end up on youtube watching a few 360 degree videos. There's lot's of stuff that hints at the potential of VR, but I have yet to come across any really compelling experiences.
Amazon is great at recommending things I want to buy ... after I've already bought them. Hey you bought a nice TV; here are some more nice TV's. Thanks, already got one. I guess I probably don't buy enough from Amazon for them to properly profile me though, so maybe that's not fair, but on the surface, that seems to be about the level of intelligence behind their recommendations.
There is a tiny bit of rationale to it, albeit not much. This is a sous vide cooker, and cooking times can be several hours (I've done a 24 hour pulled pork recipe). If you had a two hour cook, for example, you could prep it before you went to work, and then start it with the app two hours before you head home, and that would work even if you weren't sure beforehand what time you'd be heading home. Never done that, but you could.
Completely unnecessary cloud linkage of products is one of those things that's going to come to a head one of these days. I have one of those Anova Culinary Precision Cookers, and earlier in the year they updated their app and all of a sudden, you had to create an account online and sign in to use the app, a requirement which they dropped on users with no warning or explanation. Bear in mind that all this app fundamentally does is set a temperature and a time on the cooker. They subsequently claimed it was something to do with security improvements and Google Home integration, but somehow requiring signing in to a cloud account in order to set a timer between two devices on my own LAN seems like more of a security hole than an improvement, maybe it's just me. Fortunately the thing can be used on manual, and as far as I can tell they can't do remote firmware updates, so they can't brick it. But this kind of thing just seems stupid.
Stacked SLP, often referred to misleadingly as a "stacked logic board"
Okay, you told me what Stacked SLP doesn't mean, but what does it mean? Is this one of those things everybody else knows except me?
None of the acronyms on wikipedia seem to fit, and all 129 search results on "stacked slp" seem to refer to regurgitated iPhone X stories with no explanation of the term.
However searching for "slp" alone, it seems to stand for "Substrate-Like PCB". From this article;
The SLP, a main substrate for next-generation smartphones, is an advanced type of the current mainstream High Density Interconnected (HDI) PCB technology. Integrating the HDI PCB with chip packaging technology, the new substrate has a better efficiency by increasing the number of layers while reducing its area and width.
So as far as I can tell, SLP basically means PCBs with more layers and smaller, higher density features, and commensurately smaller chips. One can only assume that "Stacked SLP" means, well, multiple SLPs in a stack?
The Roku Ultra is great. But its limitations are showing
It's limitations serve well to highlight the limitations of the streaming market as a whole. Because all those things that you point out that the Roku can't do, it's competitors can only do for their content, via their UI. So using those features across all the content you subscribe to, via a consistent UI, is only possible if you're willing to live in a single ghetto, and eschew the content only available elsewhere. And with the proliferation of streaming services, increased fragmentation of content availability, and ratcheting up of prices, that is heading towards a worse and worse experience.
In a fantasy future world, some sort of meta-streaming service will emerge, and people will be able to access shows from all the streaming services via it. Providers will realise that it's not practical for everybody to subscribe to every streaming service, and that it's better to make their content available to a wider audience via such a service than to use it as a tool to make people choose one service or the other. Well, a man can dream. For the moment, cable TV plus downloading and my own personal streaming service is about as close to the ideal as I can get.
If there is one plus side to the whole sorry affair, it's that the response from some of the celebrities involved may have shifted attitudes on such things. Movie star Jennifer Lawrence, whose private photos in various states of undress were leaked, pointed out that those viewing and commenting on the pictures were "perpetuating a sexual offense and you should cower with shame."
Have attitudes changed though? Do they even need to? Some major sites may have implemented policies to ban stolen photos, more through fear of lawsuits than any moral shift I suspect, but the Fappening pics are all still readily available online, and I can only speak for myself, but I'm certainly not cowering in shame for having looked at them.
At the end of the day, they were pretty tame, mostly not-particularly-sexy pics of people I don't personally know (and in the cast of most of the "celebs" involved, had barely heard of), which I checked out to satisfy some mildly voyeuristic curiosity, shrugged and moved on. Regardless of J-Law's hyperbole and similar, I just can't make myself feel too bad about it. It's like rubbernecking at a car crash; you didn't make it happen, you wouldn't wish it to happen, but there it is, what can you do?
@ THMONSTER - that's the one!
I don't recall who it was by or what it was called, but I read a sci-fi book which covered the dying off of insects worldwide. It was pretty scary; according to said book, without fungus gnats, we would be pretty much overrun by fungi, so what crops didn't fail due to lack of pollinators would be taken out by fungi, and everybody would starve and die.
I don't know if I need to warn about spoilers in a book I can't name, by an author I can't remember, but spoiler alert! In the book, however, the cause of the die off was some sort of shared genetic time-bomb, and the eventual solution was to jurassic-park some fossilised insects whose genetic clock had thus been paused for a long time, and so wasn't on the same cycle as the insects that were dying off. Presumably the cause and solution of our die-off is somewhat different.
Never mind the security aspects, but if it involves anything outside of standard protocols, consider me fundamentally unimpressed. Faster wi-fi ... as long as you use our routers, our phones, our tablets, etc? **** right off. I'm sick of manufacturers trying to hook people into their little "ecosystems", with features that only work as long as you buy all their kit. My money goes to manufacturers whose gear works best with everybody's kit, and who put there efforts into ecosystem-agnostic improvements, thank you very much.
Can I vote for Consider Phlebus (Iain Banks)?
Rhiiiiight. And what sort of budget did you have in mind for that? I'm a huge fan of the Banks' work, but I hope nobody ever attempts to make a movie out of any of them. The amount of butchery required to squeeze a huge-scale epic space opera of that kind into a two hour movie ensures that it will lose all its character, and nobody is ever likely to spend the kind of money that would be required to do the stories justice. Just look at the adaptations of Frank Herbert's Dune as a cautionary tale. Some things are best left on the printed page, and visualized in one's imagination.
I tried a virtual credit card (Entropay), the plan being that I'd top it up with only the amount needed for a particular purchase, and not leave it with more than a few quid balance. However I had a lot of trouble with it getting rejected, so I stopped bothering with it.
Me? Dodging taxes? I donner what you're talking about!
Why is that? Serious question, I have no clue about parachuting. But this thing claims an altitude of up to 10000ft, and Google says you can typically deploy a parachute down to 2000 feet, or even 700 feet for a reserve chute. So to the non-expert at least, it looks like there's parachute potential from an altitude standpoint. Presumably you'd have some sort of break-glass-to-access emergency button that would stop the rotors if you wanted to bail out, so you wouldn't get diced. As long as you have the altitude, it seems like it could work.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2018