No one will care
Anyone running ancient platforms doesn't want to play the 2018 version of the game, but the version that was current back when that ancient platform was not ancient.
12863 posts • joined 12 Feb 2011
No, Sprint towers will dump CDMA and go all LTE (or be phased out where there is already good T-Mobile coverage)
Verizon is dumping CDMA/EVDO by the end of next year (you won't be able to activate a non-LTE phone on their network after this June) so most likely they will do the same for Sprint's network. There are enough GSM non-phone devices (medical monitors, alarms, data loggers and so forth) that use GSM that GSM coverage will need to be maintained for the foreseeable future, but CDMA will be a thing of the past quite soon - it was probably one of the reasons Sprint wanted to do this as upgrading their entire network to all-LTE like Verizon is doing is not cheap!
Remember that physical access to the phone would also be required, so sure a state actor could conceivably plant agents in five different organizations, then steal the target's phone, but since it would have to be put into a mode from which it cannot resume normal operation at least they couldn't do it without the target's knowledge.
You can come up with improbable what-ifs for almost everything, but I think the scenario you describe is a lot more work than simply kidnapping your target and beating him with a rubber host until he unlocks his phone for you. Unless your target is a world leader constantly surrounded by security I don't see how kidnapping isn't far easier - and if this scheme is implemented world leaders will insure they get phones without the easy-unlock keys us little people have to use.
One possible improvement would be that keys are generated and stored encrypted with another key - the private key of which is sent to a third party. So if Apple's giant DB 'o keys was stolen, the miscreants would also need to steal the third party's giant DB 'o keys as well. This would also prevent rogue elements in a phone OEM from hacking/misusing access to the keys.
Companies like Apple could get out of the business of being the arbiter by giving keys upon request by the third party, and the third party would get the unwelcome job of being the arbiter. You could even have more than one third party - though they'd all have to agree a request is legit but that way you could have one in the US, one in China and one in the EU, for example.
In order to make something like that work the US, EU and China would need to have some sort of treaty to make it all work, which is the genius part of the plan - it would take so long for them to negotiate this all that half of us would be dead by the time we have to worry about this :)
Why do they want to be in the business of determining which law enforcement requests are legit? That's not exactly an easy problem, either. You could probably assume an organization like the FBI could have a pretty solid process for who gets to make such requests, under what circumstances, how they are passed to Apple so Apple knows they are legit, etc.
How about a 10 man police department? Do they get to make requests themselves, or do they have to forward them up to a larger organization? If they have to request the help of their state police, or the FBI, then those organizations have to create a way to determine whether it is a legit request or someone is going outside the law hoping to steal his ex-wife's phone and illegally spy on her.
That doesn't even get into other countries, who might not observe the legalities that would (hopefully) be observed in the US. If Apple decides a country is using their police powers to spy on their citizens by unlocking their phones when they are not guilty of any crime, do they get to say "sorry, we won't do unlock requests for country X" and then country X may ban sales of their products in response. Or if they decide misuse of unlocking is not their problem, and respond to all such requests, then they have to deal with the blowback from people back home who will accuse them of helping a country violate their citizens human rights and maybe have congress looking to sanction them for helping evil country X. It is a lose/lose for Apple either way.
Even on Earth, where fossils are (presumably) far more plentiful than they would be on Mars, it would be very difficult to pick a landing site from 40 million miles away, and be lucky enough to find fossils within a small area around the attempted landing zone.
While you probably only want a .eu if you have or intend to have some sort of business connection with the eu, maybe you want it so you can register adi.eu or some other "clever" URL (though whois says it is taken, maybe there are some other French words that are available)
Stone buildings are cold on Earth because blackbody radiation is only a tiny portion of their heat loss. Most of it is to the ground, the air, water (rain/snow) etc. which cause them to lose heat far more effectively than in a vacuum.
Also, if the stone buildings you have been are in cold, it is because they were poorly built and leaked air, and/or the walls were thin. Adobe houses have two foot thick walls and maintain temperature quite well since the thermal gradient matches the day/night cycle. Igloos maintain temperature well despite being made of ice, because they have similarly thick walls.
I agree acceleration would be an issue, and maybe 100m is overkill, but even with 1m thick walls you will likely have a problem with too much heat inside, rather than not enough, because of all the power use inside (I won't count the people, since some fraction of the power use inside will be growing food that keeps people alive and thus generating body heat)
If people are living inside, how's the heat going to escape though a hundred meters of solid rock, when the only method of surface dissipation is blackbody radiation? With a very small surface area to volume ratio, it isn't going to be able to shed heat very quickly.
Even if your power generation is external (nuclear or fusion are the only options) the consumption of such power will be internal, so you will in fact have to take measures to actively dispose of excess heat!
Why would Intel's stock take a bath, or even be affected? They don't have any foundry business worth mentioning, so if they lost it to TSMC et al it wouldn't affect them. They will still sell just as many Intel Core <indecipherable number> CPUs because people who need a PC/server will buy one.
Maybe AMD can get a brief leg up on Intel performance-wise, but they had that for a couple years in the Athlon vs P4 days, and it barely registered as a blip on Intel's stock.
I hope you understand that just because you lost say 45% of disks and use mirroring, that doesn't imply there is no data loss - because both mirrors will fail in many cases. I'm sure someone good at calculating odds could figure out if you had say 1000 disks and lost 5%, what the odds are that you lost both ends up a mirror. If you use 6D/2P double parity RAID odds are good you would survive losing 5% of drives, but maybe not 10%.
A stock exchange really should have a remote replica - probably not geographic because latency is going to be a problem, but even a few miles away would insulate it from issues like this one, a power outage that affected both is unlikely to be an issue since that will protect you against one-off issues with a UPS or generator transfer, etc.
What sort of targeted advertising? If you had the misfortune to work at a location with background music not to your taste, getting advertisements assuming that background music is what you like is money wasted by the advertiser.
I suspect it would be more useful for determining TV viewing habits, as there is still encoded into movies, TV shows (even the ads during them) that allow audio fingerprinting software to tell what you are watching even if you're over at a friend's house. Just because the fingerprinting happens locally doesn't mean Google isn't collecting the data daily and saving it along with all the other megabytes of personal info they've collected on your that helps advertisers target you more precisely: "we want males age 30-40 who watch Fox News or American Idol" etc.
If any good comes of the whole Facebook debacle, beyond posturing politicians, hopefully it will be some laws that require that single check box that stops "phoning home" - and that if you want to enable some restricted phoning home (like a 'find my phone' service) it can't require you to re-enable everything only the minimum required to perform the requested function.
That's how I'd prefer to operate all modern "phone home" type devices/software. First, hit the big red button to disable everything. Then, when stuff doesn't work I can give it permission to enable the minimum to get stuff I want to work working again.
Sort of like how iOS does app permissions - they install with no permissions, but if it wants to access photos it will tell you and you can accept or not, but if you do it doesn't also get the ability to listen to the microphone since that's a separate permission, Its certainly not a perfect solution, but a damn sight better than the typical "opt out" strategy for privacy that most devices/software practice.
Let's say you hack into Google's internal network, and have the run of the place. Your data, and the data of two billion other people, is in there somewhere. It seems highly unlikely they have an internal web site where you can plug in a person's name and see a link "click here to download DougS.zip" to get everything they have on me.
Let alone getting it all. Even at a lowball estimate of a megabyte per person that's going to take a LONG time to download the whole database. With a 10 gigabit link running full bore you're talking like three months - and you better have a large datacenter handy to store it all!
Google doesn't sell your data, per se, they "sell" you as an advertising target but the companies that advertise with them don't literally get a list of names with a complete list of what each person searched for, locations they've been, etc.
Apple doesn't sell any ads, so they literally CAN'T monetize your data in the way Google and Facebook do. Conspiracy theorists like to claim "yeah maybe they don't sell personalized ads based on your data but they still sell it to others" without providing any evidence. I could claim that Google sells the search terms of grade school kids to cereal companies and toy manufacturers, and be equally credible.
You haven't been paying attention, China created their own non US phone system half a decade ago. Very few Android phones sold in China include Google anything - they take the open source part of Android and layer Chinese alternatives like Baidu, WeChat, etc. Google lost that market years ago, and even if China and the US became better friends than the US and UK they'll never get it back. The Huawei and ZTE situation will not affect this at all, because it can't get worse.
As for Apple, I'm sure they've got contingency plans on contingency plans for what happens if the Chinese government created a disruption to iPhone manufacturing. While it would undoubtedly be painful for them in the short run it would be 1000x more painful for China in the long run! They'd leave China behind, which even for a company the size of Apple would just be a blip on an economy the size of China's, but they would be the tip of the spear.
Companies relying on Chinese manufacturing would realize if they're willing to interrupt manufacturing for a company the size of Apple, they'll do it for anyone. There would be a stampede of companies taking their manufacturing out of China, and their economy would crater. China knows this, which is why it won't happen.
They extrapolate from data they get from carriers, and retail stores that sell iPhones. Maybe Apple is selling 100% iPhone X, and maybe they are selling 1% iPhone X, the analysts are just making the assumption that the product mix for people buying from Apple is the same as people buying from Verizon or Target....I doubt they are exactly the same, but I see no reason they should be wildly different.
Curious what needs you have that phones five years ago met but today's don't? I guess if you consider a 3.5mm port a must have then Apple's latest aren't for you, but other than that what has Apple taken away? If you are an Android guy, anything that gets taken away on some models like 3.5mm, SD, removable battery, etc. are still available somewhere, you just can't get them all in the same phone if you buy a flagship.
But why would you restrict yourself to flagships? After all, if smartphones five years ago did what you want, you can't exactly complain about low end performance since today's $100 Android phone has performance that matches if not exceeds a 5 year old flagship...
This is the first time Apple offered three generations of iPhone. Had they not continued to sell the 6S/6S plus, some of the people who bought them might have bought used/refurbished iPhones instead of new ones, and if so the percentage of 8/8+/X purchases would have been a bit higher.
The rumors had pretty much everything Apple did leaked before their September announcement, but I don't recall anyone predicting they would keep selling the 6S/6S plus. That was a surprise, and I wonder if it was a one time thing / experiment or if they will be selling the 7/7 plus/8/8 plus alongside the three new models (they will drop the X because its replacement will already have a price cut versus the $999 it is selling for today thanks to resolving their terrible yields for the 3D sensors they were having until the end of the year)
I agree that services is going to become more and more important for them, since it is where Apple's best growth story is now that the smartphone market has no growth left (except maybe at the very low end as the remaining feature phones are driven out by ultra low end smartphones)
I called this last fall. Having a single model was never going to drive a supercycle, because at least half their sales of new phones are 'plus' sized, and the starting price was too high for mass adoption. Next fall is when the supercycle of 6/6S/7 owners upgrading happens, because Apple will have three new phones (assuming rumors are true)
6.5" - bigger iPhone X
5.8" - iPhone "X+1"
6.1" - cheaper iPhone X with LCD instead of OLED
That will give people options on what to upgrade to that are mostly the same, instead of the high priced X making the 8/8 plus look outdated in form and features. They'll be able to have a starting price where the normal iPhone starting price is of $699 or perhaps $749 at most, then the "X+1" will probably be $899 instead of $999 like this year.
Any company that has failover technology but doesn't properly test it so they know it will kick in when needed will NEVER have the will to devote the resources necessary to developing a real continuity plan for when their primary goes down and failover fails!
The days when the US and USSR had nutjob hawks worrying "what if the other side launches a huge strike and we don't get our retaliation launched in time so they win" are long past, submarines made those fears silly. So there is no reason for major nuclear powers to ever give AI control over launch decisions (though I think some of us might sleep a bit better if AIs were given veto rights over presidential launch orders in the US)
The wildcard dictatorships like North Korea won't hand over control to an AI because Dear Leader will want to keep that authority solely in his own hands. The ones in between who don't have dictators but don't have submarine launched ICBMs like Israel and South Africa probably don't have any reason to hand over control to an AI either. They would rely on the US to retaliate for them if they suffer a first strike and lose their ability to retaliate on their own.
Even if it were possible (someone beat me to the "space is really big" part of the argument) what good would such sentinels do? An object with an eccentric orbit taking it to the Oort Cloud will be moving pretty fast as it approaches the asteroid belt - if it was found to be on a collision course with Earth it would be far too late for us to do anything about it. The sentinels wouldn't have nearly enough time to alter the course of anything big enough to really hurt us.
The sooner some enterprising ISPs will find ways to really abuse their new freedom, giving perfect examples for net neutrality supporters to point to. Oh, you can bet the big ones like Comcast, AT&T, and Verizon will be on their best behavior at first, since they know people will be watching them closely. It will be the second tier of more regional ISPs that will find new revenue streams irresistible and take things way too far as a result.
Was it evidence of his guilt, so their shooting could be justified - killing someone for simply running should not be permissible since the cops were not "in fear for their lives" and they did have any evidence that he was an imminent danger to others should he flee. Or perhaps were they concerned is phone might have evidence of of THEIR guilt - maybe they were on the take from him and were trying to squeeze him for more and they wanted to make sure he hadn't recorded any previous meetings?
I think any cops going this far almost certainly have something to hide and should be investigated. This is not and should never be allowed to be normal police procedure! If the police won't return the phone to the widow, or if they do return it broken, that should be treated as probable cause for someone higher up than the Tampa police to get involved and start investigating these possibly crooked cops.
What are you objecting to them sniffing, what programs you watched? If you are really that concerned you could swap accounts with a different friend every month (assuming you have a lot of equally paranoid friends)
But what you are really saying is that you want to not pay anything for their stuff, so you have seized upon "sniffing my shit" as your excuse to try to justify your theft.
This is about as clear a case as we could hope for - if they are able to recommend tags for people based on their facial recognition, they sure as hell have the ability to recognize him in ads. Maybe not 100% of the time and with no false positives, but if they were 98% they'd reduce a lot of the harm to his reputation (and to those who get scammed) and the small false positive rate can be handled on appeal from the advertiser (or they can replace the face in their ad with someone else who looks less like him)
If Apple wanted to reduce exposure to ISA implementation issues like Meltdown and Spectre, having the secure enclave use RISC-V while the 'real' CPU uses ARM64 might not be a bad idea. And if Apple decided it wanted to use RISC-V for that, throwing a little funding to the "brains behind seL4" for the port would be money well spent.
"You still need to identify the plug if it contains a fuse that could be anything from 1A to 13A."
Only if you are in the developed world.
You'll find out pretty quickly if the fuse is too small!
Though I'm sure it'll generate some downvotes, the idea of having a fuse in a cable is ridiculous. If a cable is in the US is UL listed, it will have the correct gauge for the length given the NEMA/IEC plug type, and it isn't permitted to for example have an 18 gauge cable that's 50 feet long just because you think you will only draw 1A across it.
except off the shore, where wind energy is best, due to liberals who suddenly became ulta-conservatives and blocked them
This isn't a liberal or conservative thing, it is a "I paid big $$$ for my oceanfront property, and I'll be damned if I have to look at a wind turbine a few miles offshore, let the farmers and poor people look at them" thing.
While natural gas is indeed cheap in the US, wind power is cheaper still - even without subsidies it would be cheaper (and people shouldn't fool themselves into think that natural gas production isn't subsidized, gas & oil tax breaks have just existed a lot longer so the industry likes to cry foul on wind/solar tax breaks and change the subject when their own are mentioned)
This is the reason Trump can't bring back coal no matter what promises he makes - it is more expensive than natural gas, and more expensive than wind. The only reason to mine coal is to burn in existing plants. There probably won't be any new coal plants built in US, and environmentalists won't even have to protest to make that happen - the utilities' beancounters will protest for them!
The only place where new coal plants could even potentially make sense would be in the NE where there isn't much of a natural gas grid and not many areas good for large wind turbines. But more likely they'd just build more power lines to import the growing excess of wind power from the plains states - MidAmerican Energy (owned by Berkshire Hathaway) will be generating 95% of the annual consumption of its customers via wind by the end of next year.
Is the author SERIOUSLY that naive?
All its going to take is ONE PERSON to figure out where to drill it, and then everyone else just needs Google.
And only a moron would have a "smart" lock as the only way into their house. What's wrong with leaving a traditional lock on a back/side/garage door, so you have a way in if something goes wrong with it? I sure hope no one is dumb enough to believe that a smart lock improves their security. It improves their convenience only.
I'm going to laugh when in a few years people start having their house robbed due to a security issue with a no longer supported smart lock, and insurance companies deny those claims because they failed to properly secure their house.
If you know how to pick a lock it doesn't matter if the tumblers are worn or not. If you don't know, it also doesn't matter if they are worn. If you usually enter via your garage and don't insert a key in your front door very often, even over 30 years it will still be in like-new condition.
You're dodging the real issue though, which is that Google is unlikely to support this Nest lock for more than about five years, so the true cost will be vastly higher than a regular lock over a 30 year period. Maybe the sort of people buying these figure they'll be in a new house in five years, or aren't smart enough to understand that the support window for tech (especially where Google is concerned) is quite short.
One of the major advantages of corporate structure is to distribute responsibility and make it very very difficult to hold individuals liable for the actions of the collective. The EU might think twice about holding anyone criminally liable for the actions of a corporation, as the next logical step would be to hold individuals criminally liable for the actions of the EU!
Reduced taxes for everyone? There are around 750 million people in the EU, if we assume half of them are taxpayers, a 3.75 billion euro fine - which would be pretty sizeable even for a company like Google - would reduce the taxes by 10 euros per person on average. For a single year.
I don't think you should think about fines in that way, they won't be large enough or numerous enough to have a noticeable impact on taxes. Besides, all the money collected is probably eaten up by enforcement - not just of successful settlements, but all the times they investigate and end up doing nothing.
I used to be OCD about keeping my inbox clean, and filing away emails older than a few weeks I didn't feel I could delete yet in folders with imaginative names like 'save' but I found it was a lot easier to only delete the ones I obviously would never need (basically spam) and keep everything else. I decided that around 2006, because that's when my current inbox begins.
Now if I need something, I search my inbox - turns out that's quicker that remembering if I put an email from someone I met on my 2001 trip to Scotland in 'save', 'golf', or 'travel' and looking in each... Current size is 1.9 GB, the one thing I still almost always delete are emails with large attachments :)
To the extent that ZTE was selling phones in markets that required Qualcomm chips (i.e. for CDMA support) their unsold phones will be sold by someone else, who will buy more chips from Qualcomm.
Qualcomm's big problem is that no one is going to need their chips pretty soon since CDMA is going away. Verizon will be shutting off their 2G/3G networks at the end of next year (they will only activate new phones on their network after June 30th this year if they support LTE) so phones sold next year will probably begin dropping CDMA support and once they do they no longer need Qualcomm. Maybe some still choose them for the SoC, but that will be prime time for Samsung, NVidia, Rockchip etc. to start making inroads into phones sold for the US market (and Intel of course for Apple)
That's the real reason they are dropping, and the layoffs they announced have told the market they know they're going to hurt and are preparing for it.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019