Government: We really like the idea of being able to watch every currency transaction in real time...
IBM: We can sell you a bitcoin system.
Government: We don't really like terrorist money, or people mining free cash...
IBM: We can sell you an IBMcoin system. Please fill in the details on this rather large cheque.

At least it works for gaming. Watching somebody code using a small font size, in a tiny window, down-sampled to 720p and then compressed to hell is about as much fun as... watching someone code. What ever happened to doing?

Why bother? The NSA has already done most of them. It would just be redundant.

Well in that case I guess I must play role of appropriate personality type X to go and find the resource. As it turns out my vague recollection was exactly wrong, it is not choosing beliefs that imposes a cognitive load. Processing other people's beliefs imposes cognitive load (I would speculate this would be some kind of role-playing operation happening at a low (automatic) level).

So, in the context of online discussions it would work out the other way: that recognising that other people have differing beliefs would impose a greater cognitive load. Anyway, the experiment design that they used is quite cool so if it interests you the article is at this location.

It does provide an interesting approach to training though. If we haven't produced a grandmaster for decades then we could simply increase the ratings of our national contenders by hundreds points so that they make fewer mistakes. It doesn't even matter if they are really that could, we could just keep doing it until they play like machines.

I can't be bothered to check something that I vaguely remember, but luckily there are many people with the personality type to do this, reading this very thread. Woot.

Doesn't #2 impose a greater cognitive load than #3? Which of course would make it more tiring to maintain in the long run.

So your presumption is wrong.

What have you learned about how *other people* filter and interpret information they read in comments? In particular maybe you have learned something about how uniformed comments influence the majority of people that read them, regardless of whether or not you are in that majority.

Who claims that it transmits over the internet all of the time?

The article specifically says that it only transmits when the voice recognition icon is active. I have not read anyone who has stuck wireshark on it and said "holy crap this transmits all the time". Are you just making shit up, because you are not doing it very well. The trick is to use an element of truth, which you seem to have skipped.

We wanted a 55" and it had to be Samsung as I like the image processing magic. Netflix is great, the app gets used every night. Good image, good enough controls (fast forward and rewind could be improved. Everything else on a SmartTV is total crap and was tested once. The skype client is truly awful.

Gesture recognition is used once in a blue moon when the couch has eaten the remote.

So that means that you don't own a laptop with a builtin webcam?

I've got one of these TVs and although the article is accurate the headline is not. When you issue a voice command you have say "Hi TV" or one of two other phrases. These are simple enough to be recognised by the TV itself. Normally you repeat this about 10 times in varying pitches and speeds because the recognition is crap. At this point a big microphone appears on the screen and what you try to say next it records and transmits over the internet to some service.

No matter what you actually say the TV then tries to change the colour key, or randomly fires up skype. After which you disable it completely in the menus and it never records you again.

August 13th 1954?

My bank has pain-in-the-ass 2FA. There is a piece of partly public info (social security), followed by a short pin code, that leads to a challenge-response with a grey box that has my unique token in it as a smart card. Although the box is USB the browser plugin demands custom device drivers that do horrific things to ensure they are "alone" on the system.

All of this protects me against a hacker breaking my password, which would be impossible, and has no effect on the much more likely attack of a hacker targeting the bank itself. So I have to access my bank from a custom VM because the other plebs like to choose "bigtits" as their secure password.

2FA is the overrated wet dream of sysadmins everywhere.

I love you, whoever you are. You may collect your prize of an internets at your convenience.

I tried to use this a while ago with local unique passwords. Could not get it to work without allowing unauthenticated logins, which was a bit scary. Seemed like a neat feature though as it is more available than rdp/vnc running inside the guest. Will probably have another go when I get some time. In combination with teleporting guests between hosts I can have some fun.

Ah a drive by troll. How refreshing. Today I am bored enough to respond.

Once there was a Mongol army of such power and ferocity that it came close to wiping out western civilisation as we know it. So you are suggesting we should worry about that happening again? Are you really worried about getting nuked today, or tomorrow? I'm not. But then again I associate the frequency of an event with the risk of it reoccurring. I guess that by your reckoning we should not, and that all events that have ever happened are equally probable in the future, so we should treat them all the same.

I will now start worrying about herds of velociraptors raging across major cities causing carnage and destruction. After all, it is about the same level of hysteria as complaints that the one-time mob attack of a paediatrician is relevant 15 years after the event.