I guess that's a sexier headline than "Expert Soccer Player Has Good Muscle Memory", and it does tie into that recent bit of excitement down in Brazil, but otherwise I'm not seeing anything in the summary that comes as a surprise... Is it that part where they quantify the differences in neural activity between "expert" and "amateur"?
Most of us drone users stay well away from houses.
As I said, I live in the country.
Most ATVers, snowmobilers, boaters, hunters, etc are perfectly respectable people who go out of their way not to bother anyone, and I have no issue with them.
Those other fuckers, however... I have absolutely no doubt that drone technology will become simple and ubiquitous enough that the sort of asshole who enjoys annoying people with expensive toys will inevitably discover and abuse it.
It's possible to connect a controller to an antenna that vastly extends its range. Is your property extensive enough to give you a 2-kilometer perimeter around your house?
I specifically said "the signal range of my house". Stock antennas on a router in the basement. If my network can see the drone, it's going to be pretty close.
The owner will see all this, and might take umbrage at your stealing their drone. Which almost certainly wouldn't be flying over your roof anyhow.
Well, I live in the country. If a wifi-controlled drone gets within signal range of my house, the owner is very likely trespassing and almost certainly snooping on my property in particular.
I want to see a security tool which hijacks the drone control connection, lands it on my roof, and shuts it down so it won't leave.
I can't quite decide if the followup should be "call the police", "hold drone ransom" or "just keep it", but I'm sure I'd think of something.
but any other area where the experience is worse than stock android of the equivalent version just seems weird.
Most of the genuine bugs described (versus the braindead design decisions) appear to be related to hardware integration (i.e. the input stack) and/or the carrier part of the experience.
Am I surprised that the hardware integration on a cheap phone might be crap? Nope. Am I surprised that the carrier integration might suck? Nope. Am I surprised that the more a device deviates from the mainstream, the weirder the problems would be? Nope. Is it likely that the experience would actually be *worse* if the vendor had just shipped AOSP? Very.
I bought the LG Optimus not because it was the cheapest or because I didn't expect it to have bugs, but because it was the only offering with a slide-out keyboard, and I've become addicted to the precision of physical keys.
So, in a nutshell, the answer to your question about why this stuff happens is "I want something so badly that I'm a captive market who won't explore decent alternatives (is the built-in slider on a 4" phone really that much better than an S5 bluetooth keyboard case or Swype on a phablet? Really?) and will stick with the phone in spite of it being a piece of shit"?
Honestly, I have to give kudos to LG for gauging how desperate the potential users of this phone would be for a physical keyboard and saving themselves a little cash on testing. It seems to have worked out okay for them.
Why haven't all airplanes been upgraded so the black box data is streamed to satellites/ground stations?
In general, I don't entirely disagree. In this case... I'm not sure how useful the black box would be in the event of a missile strike. I wasn't aware the civilian aircraft had the kind of gear to track a missile, or that the kinds of collision sensors they have would be fast enough to catch it. It's definitely not going to be able to tell who shot the missile or where it came from. Heck, I'd be surprised if the black box could tell the difference betwen a missile strike and a large suitcase bomb in the cargo hold. So unless it actually was an mechanical or aircrew failure (and I highly doubt it), I think the black box is a red herring.
Passwords have been stolen just by listening to keyboard click noises. Why could a typewriter be any different?
A much stronger mechanical action which generates multiple (the keypress itself plus the imprint on paper action) strong and distinct signatures. I'd expect it would be far easier to pick up than even the loudest Model M keyboard...
I'd be curious how much a highly sensitive seismic sensor on the ceiling below the typewriter would pick up, or even on the foundation of the building.
There simply MUST be a clear distinction maintained over where something is located, or country borders don't mean anything.
The question to ask is, is the data stored in another country as easily available to a
Microsoft employee in the USA as data stored in the USA would be?
There's a compelling argument, and multi-national corporations in particular make themselves vulnerable to it, that if you ignore borders in your day-to-day operations then you can't exactly point at the border as an insurmountable issue when someone is making you do something you don't want to do.
The recent case where a Canadian court ordered Google to censor results globally is another example of this. People argued that the court only has jurisdiction over google.ca results, but conveniently forgot that google.ca is hosted in the exact same server farm as all Google search services. So where do you draw the line? Surely not where the corporation decides it's convenient in that particular instance.
It would also significantly cut down Slashdot comments if they had to be typed on paper and mailed.
Buying typewriters may be cheaper than Tempest shielding.
Of course, they do have to work a lot harder to avoid someone just eavedropping on the keypresses...
I keep the following quote pinned in Google Keep to remind myself of what happens when corporate communications becomes completely divorced from reality:
In other words, better execution and innovation through strategy and goal and discipline and engineering coherence.
From the previous Microsoft CEO. Nice to see that Ballmer's ghostwriters are still with the company.
Of course it has a boss
Um... no. Pure communism is incompatible with the entire concept of "boss", unless you're using "boss" as some kind of shorthand for "what society needs".
Real communism doesn't even have a "boss"
Theoretical communism doesn't have a "boss".
Real communism, as practiced by real people, has an entire class of people who are "the boss".