Crypto transactions can be traced back through the (public) blockchain. A service where you deposit some tainted crypto and then are handed an equal value of others (minus a service charge) makes tracing those new coins back to their (illicit) source very difficult.
IOW, money laundering.
Miss.
So it's not for you. You don't understand or need the use case.
And you've done nothing to explain what the use case is. As far as I can tell, the use case is "Someone who wants to use their phone to control the TV instead of the TV remote," which is a tremendous amount of technological overhead for such a negligible benefit.
It's way easier to point your camera at the screen and do an instant sign-in on the TV than it is to get your phone connected to the right Wi-Fi network and cast to the right TV, so the use case would have to be pretty compelling to make up for what a pain in the a** it is when it works, much less when it doesn't.
You're coming across as "old man yells at cloud", and about something you don't even use!
Major correction here: about something that I have tried to use on many, many occasions, but never used successfully. There's a difference.
I won't read or engage further as I for one only spend my time on worthwhile things and you seem stuck in the mud.
You won't read or engage further because you don't actually know any compelling reason to use it. If you did, you would have said what that reason was by now.
> Casting and the entire mechanism of having the device being casted to have to have direct access to the media source is idiotic and only exists because they insist on a extra level of weaponizing devices against the owners and policing what you can do with your own devices
You could have just said "I don't understand why that is needed" and saved yourself the effort.
The use case is extremely powerful. You want to direct a device to do something, rather than try to stream a 2160p video out of your phone over wifi. That's really not so hard to understand, surely?
Not really, no. If I wanted to use the TV to do all of the networking and playback, I would have just used the TV's app to do it. The number of hotels I've seen where the TV supported Chromecast or AirPlay streaming but did not have a built-in Netflix app are literally zero.
From my perspective, casting is a complete disaster by its very nature. It relies on the display device having full Internet access, which isn't a given. Literally every time I've wanted to do casting, it has been because the TV set's Netflix app wasn't working because of a network problem, and it couldn't get access to the Internet, so I was trying to use the phone's network connection. By shifting the network connectivity back to the TV set, it makes the entire system completely worthless, because the exact situations where it could be useful are the exact situations where it isn't.
If they could have the encryption present on the screen and the information only gets decrypted in your eyeballs with a valid subscription, they would.
That explains the banner I see in my field of vision: "libavcodec may be vulnerable..."
A bar I frequent has their TVs open to casting
And here come the studio's black helicopters and SWAT teams. Your bar has just violated one of the most precious market segmentation tools that content owners cherish: The ability to squeeze businesses for playing their stuff for exorbitant fees compared to home customers.
Older hardware not compatible with Windows 11. [Ducking and running]
It's not the tools on the institutional end of the educational transaction that matter. Its what the students utilize to accomplish their end.
let SpaceX do it instead.
Want to motivate them to fix the service cabin? Offer them flights on the CST-100 instead.
Majority are pro putin there or they do not care, very few are truly against this or especially are vocal about it.
1. Survival.
2. Blind loyalty. Putin is an idiot. But he's OUR idiot.
I believe this is what they call "dummy bidding".
They don't care which way the issue goes, they just want there to be a way for money in on both sides, so that no side gets its way too cheaply.
Maybe, but these figures already basically match my evaluation of the situation.
The figures can be entirely correct and still the answer can be "no". Why? Because Android might use the Linux kernel, but it isn't really a Linux distro in any meaningful sense of the word. And Steam Deck and Chromebooks *can* have some reasonable facsimile of a Linux development environment, but I'd expect maybe 0.1% of users to actually turn it on.
So most of those folks are Linux "users" in much the same way that TiVo owners were linux "users", i.e. they are using a device that deep down, at a level that the user is unaware of, runs some small subset of what a Linux distro typically contains, with a bunch of stuff on top that they mostly aren't in control over.
It's like calling Mac users UNIX users. It's technically correct — the best kind of correct — but grossly misleading.
Once inside, the hackers used the truckers' accounts to bid on real shipments,
So the hackers enter bids in the name of real truckers. Don't these truckers "close the loop" on the paperwork? They didn't bid on that load, so why are they picking it up?
Wall Street mode: Party like it's 1929.
Now get off my lawn!
You're not Dave. Who are you?
