Why was Seagate sued for using the correct amount? The SI prefixes are older then the use of them in computing. "Mega" was standardized in 1960.
Now as to why they were abused to mean powers of 2: I can understand that. However that abuse does not mean you should sue the guys that get it right.

I actually agree with some of the sentiment of the manufacturers. Most users can't handle root so you shouldn't give it to them. Manufacturers can't just work with nerds who can handle it. Ordinary users will mess things up and complain to the manufacturer about it.
However it should be a setting like "unknown sources" where those that choose it can activate it. At their own risk of course.

Haven't seen that specific case but yeah I have seen some equipment that made me go "?!? How did this design pass checks?"

With 8 a decent controller can keep it up in the air (at degraded wind resistance and maneuverability) when 3 are lost.

I'd mod you down because that is not a "naysayer" thing. It is a "yes we can" thing.
The parent was about naysayers

Hell isn't all that far from Detroit and I have been hearing they have quite a problem with, like, 2 meters of snow this year.
So yeah. Hell froze over.

I see 3 possible sources for your problem:
a. the MP3 player is badly designed. There should be sufficient capacitance to smooth the power level out to within a few percent of standard even at full read or write. Alternatively the audio traces could be routed too close to the data lines or the designer for the DAC may have had a bad day.
This means that the MP3 player was cheap enough that the designers weren't allowed the time to test their design properly.
b. Your ears are magnificent. That would cause you to hear sounds that the designers didn't feel were relevant.
c. Nocebo effect. You feel there might be a sound so there is a sound. These sounds can be really annoying.

Of course it could be something else that I have missed but these are the parts I would test.

I'd love to hook your MP3 player's audio out to an oscilloscope and see what it could be.

You should have demanded your money back. You let the bastards get away with it and not only did they not fix it, they cripled the CPU freq scaling as a "fix".

Not quite. Samsung has quite sufficient access to cc data. They probably wouldn't abuse mine. No certainty, mind you, but a chance.
If a hacker would get access to it the chance it would be abused would increase.
That is why it is better to send it to as few people as possible.

Added to that the data in the story is different. It's about data that can be copied losslessly. If I were to be filmed dancing naked to YMCA I would prefer to have it stolen by as little people as possible. My strong preference is 0.

That would be totally impossible by the way because I totally don't do that every Thursday night. *shifty eyes*.

You are not mistaken.

However, this virus apparently and logically also needs root access. Unknown sources does not grant it that. Rooting your phone does.

It needs both to work.

I have friends on the other side of the planet. I can be loud if I want to but I doubt I could shout hard enough for them to hear me.

No it doesn't. It's better to send my data only to Samsung and not to random hackers then it is to do both.

Not by much, but it is better.

I should go and cyanogen my S4 Active.

The sites that work with Ideal (my preference) send me to my bank's site to sign the transaction with a simple challenge-response OTP verification involving a separate device where I can insert my card and need to use my PIN to get to the challenge-response part.
Safe, but not too cumbersome. I love it.

Kill the antenna, not the chip. The chip is used in contact based payment too.
The antenna is usually located on the edge of the card. Get a hole punch to punch a hole in the middle of each edge of the card. Now RFID is dead but chip payment is alive.
Test it with a contactless payment point if you come across one. It should not detect anything.

If your cc is used for contactless while you have emails or papers stating that contactless should be disabled then there is no way you are liable. As for how to prove it, well I can't help you there.

And if you, logically, don't trust the manufacturer's tests there are some others who have pushed over a terabyte to SSDs:
SSD endurance experiment