You're right. The task manager was hovering around 100%, and but I forgot there was another chrome window running in the background
The most incredible thing is the speed at which it runs: 11.5 MIPS.
My desktop dual-core Xeon W3503@2.40Ghz barely manages 40 MIPS in Chrome.
The iPhone 5s is crazy fast by most standards
Ok, I could have made this a little more explicit.
For something like iMessage, where the client and the server are trusted, but not the communication channel you could very well (for example) input your user name and password on the client, have the client generate hashes of the username and login, sign said hashes with the sever's public key and send them over to the server.
That's one step better than cleartext auth wrapped with SSL but, as someone else remarked, a SRP (or even DH) exchange is pretty straightforward and pretty robust.
The username and password are sent in clear text in the SSL tunnel. So no, people at Starbucks won't get your username and password.
What this suggests is that iMessage should only be sending a hash of the username and password to Apple Servers without ever sending those things even within a SSL tunnel.
When measured against USD, maybe it seems to be. The reality is that it isn't the denomination currency for many goods and services, yet.
Once a piece of bread starts being listed for 0.01 Bitcoin no matter the exchange rate, then where is the volatility you refer to?
What happens when people start getting paid for a set amount of work or services in Bitcoins? Would that seem volatile to you then?
Exchange rates have always existed and always will. People used to pay with grain in ancient times. What do you think happened to prices of grain when there was a storm or a bad crop? Do you think it was less volatile? Did that mean people didn't use it as currency anymore?
Mr Forbes, with all due respect, your argument is simplistic. Currencies have value and exist because people believe in them. for any national currency, you are basically running credit risk against the national bank that they could ultimately refuse to exchange your Local Currency against another currency. With Bitcoin there is no central agency against which you have exposure to, you are exposed to each single individual using Bitcoins and all the people that are willing to buy them. Your risk is basically that no-one will buy your Bitcoin in exchange for a service or another currency/asset.
I am moving to a new house in the UK. The house will have very fast broadband but there is only one TV/Cable aerial to plug into which is also very inconveniently located in the property. The Cable TV provider can move it for a high fee, but the biggest issue is that there channel packages are just too expensive and not appealing to me. Ideally I would like access to the UK Freeview channels, and maybe a few extras such as Discovery Channel, Eurosport etc. All of this content would be available via IPTV which I could watch from a HTPC or simple set-top boxes. Do any slashdotters have any ideas they can share with me?"
I have a Blackberry purchased SIM free (i..e without contract) and that I happen to use on Vodafone in the UK.
Turns out that the Podcast app's auto-download and syncing function is disabled by Vodafone!
WTF? My phone and my money; I pay for 1GB of data it should be my choice if I want to use all of that on Care Bears podcasts for all I know.
I love my BB but RIM is just bending over backwards to carrier requests. The Storm was also a half-assed attempt at a touchscreen phone from a Vodafone request as they had missed out on the iPhone (o2 was exclusive at the time).
RIM grew half a testi with the playbook's bridge function, but the operators gave them a black-eye and decided not to sell the tablet.
Rim needs to realize that customers buy phones now, no longer just corporate purchase departments.
I don't give a rat which network my phone's on, but I care about my terminal.
I am your client RIM, listen to *me*, I'm your customer, the carrier's not your customer.
I know that there are countries in Europe that have lower VAT rates for computers, as opposed to game consoles.
I suspect that by adding the Linux option to their PS3s, Sony was able to switch to the reduced VAT level, as hence bag more profits for the same retail price.
This may have been revoked/no longer valid/overturned/whatever recently and hence Sony has no further incentive to offer this feature.
Could also be that being classified as a computer made the console eligible for government subsidies to buy "computers" (such as in the UK the Home Access Program - http://www.becta.org.uk/homeaccess)
Your words should fit perfectly here
in TFA there is no mention of Citigroup looking to buy Redhat; just a mention that a Citigroup stock analyst upgraded his target share price to $17 and kept the recommendation to "hold".
Once again everybody on
Sheesh people, the linked article is probably under 250 words. Could you not have given it a read? Did it not strike you as something strange that a bank would want to buy a software vendor?