No. At least not one that makes sense for storing one or two copies of a consumer hard drive. And you're stuck with a huge investment in one generation of tapes, unlike HDDs where you can gradually buy bigger and better drives. I'd rather see hard drives get cheaper and tape not than nothing getting cheaper at all. What's the real practical downsides to HDDs for the average person anyway? They're standard and can be hooked up to any computer (real fun if your tape drive dies on you or is lost/stolen). They're random access. Without a tape robot it's not more convenient. Without a environmental controlled tape vault I wouldn't trust their longevity claims.

Personally I think the ideal consumer backup solution is three hard drives, one offline next to your computer and one online hooked up via high speed Internet. Anything that nukes your files can't get to your offline copy even if the online copy is hacked or accidentally sync'd, anything that destroys all local copies like theft or a fire can't get to your online copy. One drive goes bad and you should still have two good copies though RAID1 on your main computer would be nice, just to avoid the downtime.

And for what it's worth, most consumer data isn't really worth backing up as they're just a cache to the Internet. I just checked and my total personal stuff (photos, videos, documents, source code, whatever) is 370GB, while I got 10TB+ of other things. And a lot of that which goes under personal is actually "backed up" in that friends or family got copies too, so strictly speaking I could do with even less. I actually see they have 512GB thumb drives now (at insane prices), actually my whole backup could fit in that now.

Well, from the looks of it a coax cable can carry anywhere from 1000-1500 6MHz channels @ 42.88 Mbit/s so 42-63 Gbit/s, subtract TV channels (200 @ 10 Mbit? = 2 Gbit/s), divide by number of subscribers sharing the rest. It shouldn't take that much money to cut a loop in half though, just pick a midpoint and run two coax cables straight to the central office. Considering how rapidly things progress with competition I really doubt there's any technical difficulty in delivering more.

Works for the US military, with more tanks you can acquire more oil...

May the computer totally fail to realize that the bridge is about to give out or the building about to collapse or an avalanche about to hit or a dam about to burst or you're driving right into a rioting mob or some other disastrous event? Even if I assume that the car will never, ever throw the controls to me and expect me to take over doesn't exclude the possibility that I want to take immediate physical control to avoid some kind of danger that goes above and beyond a computer's understanding of traffic rules.

Most diet failures I've observed happen not because the diet doesn't work, but because once they reach their target weight, they revert to their old diet, and naturally revert to the old pattern of weight gain. This is regardless of lifestyle.

Fact is, you have to pick a diet you can live with the rest of your life. Cuz otherwise it will "fail" as soon as you stop following it.

If your brain is responding to sugar like cocaine, get your thyroid checked. That sort of response is very typical for insuffucient thyroid hormone -- the brain is always starved for glucose, so if you provide FREE SUGAR! it suddenly gets a boost, which lasts a couple hours or so.

Just because there's less or no marbling in wild game doesn't mean that "lean meat" was all they ate. Toward fall, wild game carry a lot of fat. And from what I've read, the fatty tissues were the most-prized portions, and consumed first -- being not only the most calorie-dense, but more prone to spoilage with time (fats go rancid, while meat can be preserved by drying).

So I switched to MacOS. If it's not going to be transparent and I have to spend time digging around and doing system-level stuff in the non-Unix way, why not do it on a system that's at least got great UX and lots of officially supported hardware and applications?

Like Windows, OS X, iOS, Android and.... who exactly has a network transparent protocol? The X protocol was designed when X was essentially drawing boxes and text to a frame buffer. Today the GPU is by far the second most powerful - and in some ways, the most powerful computing device in a computer. The absolutely biggest, fastest link is between your CPU and GPU with a 16x PCIe 3.0 link (15.75 GB/s) and companies are working hard to create heterogeneous computing where they even access the same memory pool so you don't even have the bus overhead. Putting a network in the middle is like replacing a mainline water pipe with a plastic straw.

The lie is that you can do network transparency without compromise. Just because the protocol is transparent it's still a straw and applications don't know they only get a sip and not a fire hose of bandwidth. Those who assume they will fail miserably and are practically unusable over a network since there's no way for the protocol to scale down the traffic. If you've got a fast network, do RDP/VNC. If you have a bit of bandwidth, do a web interface. If you have very little bandwdth, do text mode SSH. X forwarding? If I absolutely need to have an X app running (no command line, no web interface) and I'm bandwidth constraint, but it's the least bad solution to a bad situation in the first place.

With PIN-based transactions on financial cards, the PIN is defined by the contract as the method of your approval, so no other signature is required. And I have yet to meet a cashier who is qualified as a graphologist who is legally qualified to compare a signed charge slip with the signature on the back of the card. Instead, most cashiers are trained to ignore the signature, other than making sure they got one. Some chains don't even show the customer's signature to the cashier, and some don't require the customers to show their charge card.

As this rolls out, we will see that certain issuer's cards will have PIN requirements, others will have signature requirements. It will vary by bank.

Something to note is that many banks will certainly get it wrong as this rolls out. We observed this from Canada's EMV experience. The Canadian bankers all thought they'd define a certain set of rules with EMV that would ensure every card was secured by defining PIN requirements, offline transactions, dollar limits on the cards, etc. It turned out that their cards were almost unusable for a lot of transactions, and they succeeded in making lots of people switch back to cash. The US banks are not eager to repeat that experience, but they are just as likely to get it wrong.

This will likely not be a smooth transition. Merchants and customers are all going to run into roadblocks, and lots of people are going to be upset before it's all done. I'd suggest patience, and to politely let your bank know of trouble as soon as you encounter a problem. The more complaints they hear, the more incentive they'll have to fix it before their customers jump ship for the few banks that get it right.

You do realize that if they actually did that /. would be howling about 1984 and Idiocracy and how it's NSA propaganda to "trust the system" and stop thinking for themselves with pages full quoting Franklin about security and liberty. After all it had to be about humanity willingly handing over control, we already had the story were they assume control by force and that's a villain story (I, robot). Meanwhile regular people like to identify with their heroes, the villains may be monsters or aliens or robots but the heroes are 99.99% human(oid). Nobody cares that you can't identify with Sauron or Smaug or King Kong or the Borg, but for a hero AI that's going to be tough.

You have it in the Swedish series "Äkta människor" where humanoid robots = hubots are blurring the lines, but it's more of a rebellion/independence story where they're breaking out of servitude and they're certainly not humanity's heroes. As an AI story it's more along the lines of Her, with humans and robots getting emotionally involved in each other which is probably not the kind of movie you were looking for. The superior intelligence kind of robot wouldn't fit in there, if you can't care about the hero I suppose you could care about the victims of whatever conflict that is drawn up. But those poor, helpless humans who can't fix their own situation but need outside help? That's a bit dreary.

Besides, I think that's a bit too similar to actual problems in the world today, movies like to show empowerment. People sympathize with those who are powerless victims, but they don't want to identify with them. And if the AI is smart enough to control bad guys, wouldn't it also be smart enough to control the good guys? I think it would be very hard to avoid it ending up as a giant puppeteer who's now pulling all the strings. And that's again more of a creepy story where you're being manipulated without you even knowing it, like the Matrix before you take the blue pill. There is the War Games computer who learns that the only way to win is not to play but I'm really struggling to come up with another computer "hero" story.

You want to pull a "Either you're with us or you're with the terrorists." on the fricking Red Cross? I didn't know Bush was trolling /. but hey if you''ve got another George running for President could you please get Iraq right the third time?

I think you vastly underestimate the difference between knowing that "people" in the abstract, far away sense are tortured and killed compared to people you can put a name and face on. If you had to see a third world slum kid over webcam for 10 seconds each day, look him in the eyes and tell him you're not donating anything today I think most would crumble very, very rapidly even if we were relatively short on cash themselves. Yes, their goal is to spread fear and terror. The flip side of that is also to spread righteous anger and determination that such evil must be scourged from the world. If you could gather the IS warriors all in one place and aim a nuke at them, I'd push the button. And if you knew me, that's way out of character. Shit like this is what drives me to such extremes, if I didn't see it (not that I've actually watched this particular beheading) I wouldn't have felt so strongly about it.

It's kind of sad that you underestimate kids like that.

The US market is moving rapidly to chip, as the PCI has mandated a liability shift as of October 2015. After that date, any merchants who don't demand a chip instead of a mag stripe will be fully liable for any fraud on the account, so the incentive for retailers to abandon mag stripes is very strong.

I have no doubt that Coin will be implemented well, and will provide a measure of physical security that plastic cards don't. However, be assured that retailers are indeed suspicious of them because they are not original cards. No institution has yet decided to officially say yes or no to them - everyone is kind of waiting for guidance from the PCI. And with Chip-and-PIN only a year out, they may just decide to not decide.