Hell, I won't even use digital thermometers out of concern that they'll upload my body temperature to the internet. I'm not going to be uploading my vitals to some app developer in Mencino.

Honestly, I think we're seeing late-stage Apple at this point. Each new product announcement makes a smaller and smaller blip on the radar, and Apple is entirely a company whose fortunes are tied to the faddish vitality of a brand name. Every year Apple does less and less to differentiate itself, and their older products are starting to whither a bit. The people who were excited about OSX 16 years ago have less and less to be excited about with each passing year and those aren't the same people who are going to get excited over a watch or something that will tell them they need to exercise more.

I'm not saying Apple is going to crash and burn or disappear, but when a company's capitalization is their biggest news don't make the mistake of thinking the future is a foregone conclusion. (see: IBM).

~/Library/Logs/CrashReporter/MobileDevice/(your device here) or LemonJar or Settings > Privacy > Diagnostics & Usage > Diagnostic & Usage Data Gotta say, when working with Garmin to figure out how their iPhone app wasn't coping with iOS update changes (garbage collection issues) that first one was the most useful.

Your last point would be my question to the Original Poster: do you want a stable phone or a phone with lots of features? If you want an incredibly stable phone then it's easy to find and kill all of the bugs. But which is worse having buggy whizbang feature or not having whizbang feature at all? If I had to choose I would pick buggy whizbang feature. Because the only thing worse than doing something poorly is not being able to do it at all.

I worked with a company as an adviser and they refused to add whizbang because they didn't feel they could do it perfectly. Well... the outcome was that people needed whizbang and they picked buggy and slow over not-at-all. And they in my opinion picked correctly. I can tell someone that I can so that but it'll take 2 days and they might pick me. If I tell someone I can't do it at all they'll definitely pick someone else. So even if I'm slow there is still a chance I'll get the job. The end result was the product died because they refused lower their standards and compete.

This is taking place in the smartphone market. You have to have feature parity. The End. Full Stop. If you can't do what someone else is doing customers will jump ship. Android has taken over the market using this strategy and customers are generally pretty happy with the tradeoffs involved.

But you didn't eat it

Well...

To quote a commenter above:

reality is there will be collateral damage in fighting terrorists sometimes

if you travel to the middle east, don't be surprise if terrorists grab you and hold/torture/behead you

1. The court who handed down the injunction is the arbiter for copyright law

Agreed so far.

2. The cache-only service is the means of enforcing the injunction.

Nope. The cache-only service isn't the one being enjoined. The party being enjoined is ISP A (the users' ISP). However, they aren't in a position to actually do anything about the injunction because they aren't ISP B (the Pirate Bay mirror's ISP). Their only way of "handling" it is to block the site in a manner that directly harms the business of CDN C (CloudFlare) and hundreds of other innocent businesses. CloudFlare, in turn, is also not capable of truly enforcing the injunction, because the Pirate Bay website mirror can trivially switch off CloudFlare with a simple DNS change and avoid any block that CloudFlare might put up.

The sole plausibly effective means of enforcement is for the courts to order CloudFlare to disclose the source IP for the website, and to then get an injunction against the correct ISP. And if that ISP turns out to be outside the UK, then it is likely beyond the reach of UK law, and that's a reality that the UK government will simply have to accept.

3. If you go to the other end of the spectrum and follow the lowest level of law the copyright is dead on the internet.

The reality is that there will always be sites on the Internet in countries that have weak laws. Any government that thinks it can somehow put up road blocks that will adequately prevent people from accessing those sites is a government of fools. Just take a look at how many people pay for VPN service to get around geo-blocking of TV shows, or to avoid censorship by oppressive governments.

As John Gilmore put it, "The Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it." That's the way it has always been, and practically speaking, that's the way it always will be.

For this reason, if you want to fight piracy, you cannot hope to do so using technical measures. It never worked before, yet in spite of more than thirty years of trying to do so and failing (think Macrovision, floppy disk copy protection, etc.), corporations keep trying to make it work, and idiotic governments keep trying to find ways to legislatively turn this hopeless cause into something that's magically feasible. You know what they say about insanity?

Mind you, I don't have the right answer; if I did, I'd be rich. But I do know how to spot the wrong answers.

4. The cache only service could segregate the different sources to different IPs so different countries could enforce their own laws by blocking selected content.

First, there are only so many IP addresses. They can't realistically cache each site on its own IP address. The cost would be astronomical. Second, even if they could, how can you do that without also making it easier for oppressive regimes to suppress information? Ethically and morally speaking, a CDN must be content-neutral. There's simply no acceptable alternative.

Your wife's iPhone needs to be looked at. Your 5S is streaming even higher res video to another device on a WiFi network (it couldn't be the home network - nah, impossible) yet here you are, putting a trend line on something with two data points. Yeah. That's how it's done.

This shouldn't have been let out of the firehose. WTF is nerdy about this?

You're joking. Liquid mercury? Come on, show of hands: Who among us has not at some point in our lives broken open a thermometer in order to play with the mercury inside? That's a nerd rite of passage.

Hell, I'm old enough to remember when they made little maze puzzles with a blob of mercury inside that you'd try to get from one corner to the other. Those were the days before parents raised kids like veal. We had pocket knives, for chrissake. Can you imagine millennial parents giving their precious offspring pocket knives? I had my own .22 rifle by the time I was 10. All the liquid mercury I handled in my life, it's no wonder I'm half an imbecile.

What's strange about any of that?

The carved shells? They were from a Mossberg 500 Tactical Persuader pump action shotgun.

Fuck your aliens.

I know, right? It wasn't aliens that built the pyramids, or anything supernatural. It's stupid to think that.

Everybody knows it was Anunnaki, our ancestors, the Shining Ones, who gave this technology to humans over 250,000 years ago.

Whenever I hear of a story like this, I am reminded of the scene in Martin Scorsese's great movie, Raging Bull, in which Jake LaMotta, played by Robert DiNiro, speaks of an upcoming opponent to an associate:

"I'll put yous both in the ring and give yous both a fuckin' beatin', then yous can both fuck each other!"

Haven't we lost enough to the stupidity of our intellectual property laws? Could it be time to revisit whether or not they're actually doing what they were meant to do?
 

24kWh/day = 24kWh/24h = 1kW. Which is a completely ridiculous amount of electricity.

If you are using 48kWh a day on heating, a heat pump is going to pay itself back in months or even weeks.