Forgot your password?

Comment: Who's at fault for this? (Score 3, Insightful) 219

by SeaFox (#47412811) Attached to: Avast Buys 20 Used Phones, Recovers 40,000 Deleted Photos

Unfortunately, it seems most people are really bad at wiping their phone of personal data before passing it on to a stranger.

How many people actually have the ability to securely wipe data on their phone to start with, without rooting it? For lots of folks, the "factory reset" option is the only thing they can do on their own, and that likely only deletes prefs and network settings and erases file system directory info. It does not overwrite the bits in the phone's storage to make them unrecoverable.

Comment: Re:If everyone loses their jobs... (Score 1) 525

by SeaFox (#47405031) Attached to: Foxconn Replacing Workers With Robots

If everyone loses their jobs, who will be able to buy the products?

Everybody's not losing their jobs. Only the poor people who work on the assembly lines will be. As long as the iPhone's target demographic (which is "not poor people") continues to be employed, the money will keep rolling in. Those unemployed SOBs can use cheap single-core Android phones!

Comment: Re:the real question is... (Score 1) 228

by SeaFox (#47366099) Attached to: Nathan Myhrvold's Recipe For a Better Oven

The whole thing sounds like using a massive amount of expensive technology to replace a very small amount of skill.

Exactly what I think when I see those new Ford commercials with the self-parking Focus.

There's probably ways ovens can be improved for modern times, but adding a bunch of sensors and a flat panel display sounds like a way to make a simple appliance less consumer-repairable.

Comment: Re:One non-disturbing theory (Score 2) 304

by SeaFox (#47357197) Attached to: Ninety-Nine Percent of the Ocean's Plastic Is Missing

Actually, the reason that bottled water has an expiration date is that it is mandated to.

Is there a source for that? I assumed the reason water (and everything else food/drug related) has an expiration date now was for legal liability. That way there's only a limited time you can get a company for injury for using an old product (even if it was something inert enough it wouldn't expire). They can just point to the packaging and say "Well, Your Honor. Look, the item was expired and the label says not to use it past the date. The defendant willfully ingested/used it nonetheless..."

Comment: Re:Luddites on the loose. (Score 1) 199

by SeaFox (#47310063) Attached to: FAA Bans Delivering Packages With Drones

Considering these are basically miniature electric helicopters, I'm not sure a crash is really that big a deal...

To be capable of carrying a package, these are going to be quite a bit larger than some dinky RC copter.
I think being hit with one (or the merchandise it's carrying) could cause significant injury.

Comment: Re:Data Security Officer (Score 1) 192

by SeaFox (#47303619) Attached to: Improperly Anonymized Logs Reveal Details of NYC Cab Trips

I worked for a very long time in government. And I learned one thing: You are not supposed to know shit. You are supposed to buy knowledge.

Isn't that how the entire job market works? That's why we have the education loan bubble we have -- employers don't believe you know anything without a piece of paper showing you spent thousands of dollars to learn it.

Comment: Re:Auctioning money? (Score 1) 101

Maybe because by actually converting the currency to money, they're sending the message that they accept it as real money and will use it. It gives a aire of legitimacy to it they don't want to impart. But selling it is simply offering it and taking what they can get. It doesn't say that they think it's worth anything, just that the bidders do. Kind of like if I took a dirty sock and auctioned it. I can say I believe it to be trash all I want then. If someone pays me $10 for it, it doesn't mean it's really worth $10. It just means someone out there is stupid enough to pay $10 real dollars for it, like any other piece of virtual property.

Comment: Re:stupid premise (Score 3, Informative) 116

by SeaFox (#47219541) Attached to: Physical Media: Down, But Maybe Not Out

What "visually lossless" format are you using? Does it have any actual benefits over re-encoding with a recent build of x264, given that quite a lot of DVDs available were apparently encoded with some shitty h262 codec from 1998, given the artifacts all over them?

Yes, DVDs are in MPEG2... because DVD discs have to maintain compatibility with DVD players, even older ones, and back in 1998 MPEG2 was the type of video playback hardware chips could handle. Btw, digital cable streams in the U.S. are still generally done in MPEG2 as well. There are some newer models of converters the last couple years that can handle h264, but to maintain compatibility with all the already deployed equipment providers are still feeding them the older, less efficient format.

Genuine question, I tend to rip my DVDs to 1000kbs video...

If you're encoding at a constant bitrate you're doing it like it's still 2005. Should be using a constant quality (variable bitrate) encoding setting to get more bandwidth when it's needed in high-action shots or grainy footage, and less in stark black/white screens and low movement footage.

which is approximately half the bitrate...

No, DVD's go quite a bit higher than 2000 kbps. Try 6-9000 kbps.

It also means I can deinterlace the fuckers at the same time. I utterly loathe interlacing and it's all over UK DVDs, particularly TV shows from the early 00s and before.

Most DVDs I see nowadays are progressively encoded, but okay.

"Nuclear war would really set back cable." - Ted Turner