You could do it in one second, but only if you were downloading 100GB of data. However, you are more likely to be downloading a similar volume of data as you currently do, but a whole lot quicker. After all, are you really likely to actually watch 33 movies per second?
All yours beers are belong to us!
I have a Prius (actually 2).!
You forgot to post anonymously!
OK, I'm talking more about commercial airliners here rather than piston engined aircraft, but don't they test those engines by firing frozen chickens onto them? If a lightweight plastic drone presents such a risk to an Airbus, then I might holiday closer to home on the future. Do flocks of drones really sit around on the grass at airports waiting to throw themselves into the path of approaching aircraft? Of course I'm not seriously suggesting that they present zero risk, until some loon packs them with explosives before deliberately placing them in a flight path.
Nice. But please use a proper link
Don't simply copy someone else's comment regarding one particular rogue app and cite that as evidence that this hotel chain has more interest in misusing your data than preventing another one of their customers from being raped. You sir, are a moron.
He wouldn't need to. He would simply wait until the cleaning staff were in with the door propped open with a trolley. At that point he just walks in and acts like it's his room and asks for five minutes privacy while he takes a shower. Naturally they leave him alone in the room.
No. You didn't read TFA. The target is a contactless credit/debit card carried in the victim's wallet. The phone is used by the thief, who installs basic point-of-sale software on and then bumps it against a wallet in an attempt to relieve the victim of funds. The card is a passive device which is never 'turned off'.
I'm not it can't be abused. I simply believe that in this case the hotel are genuinely trying to improve security, and for a very good reason. Perhaps people should delve a little deeper before reaching for conspiracy theories.
Of course, but I think it's no coincidence that it's Starwood who are looking into this technology.
Absolutely! This is why I hired extra security for my bat mitzvah.
Of course it should refer to defectives in the police farce.
Don't worry. Any attempt to electronically violate you as you try to enter your hotel room will certainly be thwarted by your tinfoil hat.
English can be a tricky language to master, but don't despair. I said "could" not "can", closely followed by "wouldn't" instead of "don't". Dude (or lady), if you require any additional help with the subtleties of past versus present tense, I'm sure there are a number of readers here who would be delighted to assist