Well, factories are full of stuff that can kill people and controlling those things with something an operator might treat as a personal device certainly increases the attack surface.
So maybe we're not talking about new possibilities here, but we may be talking about a new set of probabilities.
Second, this has nothing to do with cell phones, so the comment about how someone's phone doesn't cover this band and there will be no phone that do is irrelevant.
Third, it is under consideration, not a done deal. The headline is flamebait -- "FCC Undoing" is wrong. They might.
And fourth, yes, licensing small areas creates a lot more work for everyone involved than licenses for large areas. It's called "coordination", and the work goes up exponentially with the number of parties that need to be coordinated. Someone has to make sure that the licensee for Backwater, IA doesn't interfere with the licensee for South Backwater, IA. That's harder than telling T-Mobile in IA not to interfere with AT&T in the next state over.
All of that doesn't mean I support the change. It's just not that earth shattering to begin with.
I am just curious about how much human activity really has to do with climate change..
No, you're not.
The mystery surrounding the fate of a secret military satellite deepened Thursday when the Pentagon refused to answer even simple questions about whether the mission to launch it had gone awry. On Sunday, private space firm SpaceX blasted a Falcon 9
Pentagon: Ask SpaceX about Zuma. SpaceX: That's not our story to tell.Ars Technica
After Zuma, SpaceX keeps pace in preps for next Falcon 9 launchSpaceflight Now
Mystery surrounds SpaceX satellite debacleThe Australian
Newsweek-Florida Today-Tech Times-SpaceCoastDaily.com
all 82 news articles
Depending on your hardware, are you sure you're not I/O bound? Try a load with significant I/O that is nevertheless CPU bound.
In an open letter to Apple, two of its major shareholders, Jana Partners and the California State Teachers' Retirement System, have raised concerns about research that suggests young people are becoming "addicted" to high-tech devices like the iPhone and iPad, and the software that runs on them. It asks the company to take a number of measures to tackle the problem, such as carrying out more research in the area, and providing more tools and education for parents to help them deal with the issue. The letter quotes studies by Professor Jean M. Twenge, a psychologist at San Diego State University, who is also working with the shareholders in an effort to persuade Apple to do more:
Professor Twenge's research shows that U.S. teenagers who spend 3 hours a day or more on electronic devices are 35% more likely, and those who spend 5 hours or more are 71% more likely, to have a risk factor for suicide than those who spend less than 1 hour.
Other quoted research found:
The average American teenager who uses a smart phone receives her first phone at age 10 and spends over 4.5 hours a day on it (excluding texting and talking). 78% of teens check their phones at least hourly and 50% report feeling "addicted" to their phones.
According to the letter, at least part of the solution needs to come from Apple:
we note that Apple's current limited set of parental controls in fact dictate a more binary, all or nothing approach, with parental options limited largely to shutting down or allowing full access to various tools and functions. While there are apps that offer more options, there are a dizzying array of them (which often leads people to make no choice at all), it is not clear what research has gone into developing them, few if any offer the full array of options that the research would suggest, and they are clearly no substitute for Apple putting these choices front and center for parents.
The Apple shareholders behind the letter admit that it is not entirely altruistic:
we believe that addressing this issue now will enhance long-term value for all shareholders, by creating more choices and options for your customers today and helping to protect the next generation of leaders, innovators, and customers tomorrow.
Building on this, they also shrewdly point out that Apple has little to fear from moves to give parents more control over their children's use of Apple products:
Doing so poses no threat to Apple, given that this is a software (not hardware) issue and that, unlike many other technology companies, Apple's business model is not predicated on excessive use of your products. In fact, we believe addressing this issue now by offering parents more tools and choices could enhance Apple's business and increase demand for its products.
That's in contrast to Facebook or Google, for example, both which want people to use their respective products as much as possible so as to maximize the opportunities for advertising. Apple has already responded with a fairly generic reply, published on the iMore site:
we are constantly looking for ways to make our experiences better. We have new features and enhancements planned for the future, to add functionality and make these tools even more robust.
Unless that functionality goes well beyond the perfunctory, it is unlikely to satisfy the shareholder groups, who presumably want the "full array of options" they mention. The danger for Apple is that a limited response might lead to it being swept up in the growing backlash against Silicon Valley and its products, evident in a number of recent articles. One thing Apple could do is to make it easier for third parties to write apps that address the problem in a thoroughgoing way -- something its tightly-controlled ecosystem may make harder than for Android.
A broader issue is how serious the problem of gadget "addiction" in children really is -- and how it should be tackled. Clearly, the parents play a key role here, but what about the hardware and software companies who profit from it? To what extent should they provide fine-grained parental controls -- should social media, for example, offer parents the capability to limit the number and timing of daily posts made by their children, and would that even help?
Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
Technically, a government of the people by the people and of the people, should have all the power. So yes the government should be all powerful but the government should be of the people. What needs to happens is higher up the food chain you go, the less privacy you should be entitled to. At the top, zero privacy, if you want a private life, leave. What is happening is corruption, a government of the elite by the elite and for the elite and protecting their privacy, the evidence of their crimes, whilst invading our privacy to control us, not for the benefit of society, that is the lie but for their own benefit, to exploit us.
The government should have power but the people should control the government, so in reality the people have the power. I definitely approve the top down invasion of privacy model. Want privacy, do not take on any kind of public role.
"sponsoring the likes of Judith Currie and Anthony Watts": You're a liar.
I'll bet Intel wouldn't characterize THAT 10% as insignificant.
Try an I/O heavy batch process. You'll notice.
Inocência & Sedução (S/S 15 Trends). 2015 S/S TrendsPatterns http://bit.ly/2FsqrZ7
I was just pointing out that this isn't the big nothing squiggleslash was claiming. The problem is real and the exploit is practical in several very large environments.
People not in those environments probably should have had a better way to sit back a few days and wait for bug reports.
http://drugstoreinfo.net/ Alcohol Rehab Chicago Alcohol Rehab Chicago believes in a simple premise that regardless the severity and elongation of the alcohol... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=28ksvv5nYVM
You can think of it this way: the US system is designed around constraining a worst-case government, the Chinese system around enabling a best-case government.
Fortunately, Chinese culture historically has recognized that the ruler must serve the needs of the ruled to some extent, so you can have these long periods where everything is basically stable, and leaders can feel shame if the people say they are not doing a good job, but the lack of checks and balances gets you occasional things like 20 million people starved to death for political reasons during the Great Leap Forward Famine.
Thank you! That was what I was thinking of. Couldn't find a link!
Have someone else commit rape and murder for you, kind of makes no sense. The rape bit was the intent, the murder bit was to get away with rape ie to the individual other people are just disposable, no value beyond how they can be used and abused. Forget phone stuff, how about testing for psychopathy before they are let into the country. Trial and prosecution well and good but still a person horribly abused and they killed for convenience, if the attacker had been tested before being let into the country and banned as a psychopath, the victim would not have become a victim nor the tens of thousands of others. Simply test for psychopathy prior to allowing entry for all refugees and immigrants and save the lives of thousands and save the suffering of millions. Psychopaths do not commit just one crime but routinely commit crime, daily, weekly, monthly, of never mind to them, as long as they believe they can get away with the crime, they will commit the crime, no matter how viscous, ugly or petty ie kill someone so that you can get away with raping them.
via wa : http://bit.ly/AdminnManekinMur...
via tokopedia : http://bit.ly/ManekinmurahToko...
via bukalapak : http://bit.ly/ManekinmurahBuka...
via kaskus : http://bit.ly/ManekinmurahKask...
They give anaesthesia to paraplegics even though they can't feel anything below the severed nerve location. That's because paraplegics will go into shock from the pain, even though they can't actually feel the pain. Like if a paraplegic gets a broken leg. So the pain is an actual phenomenon that anaesthesia somehow blocks.
Balance Body Blueprint & 101 Weight Loss Tips http://balancebodyblueprintclkbank.com/ review Don t Waste Any More Time Or Money On Promoting Products That Just Don t Live Up To Their Claim discover This Proven New Weight Loss Product And Earn More. Payout Adjust To 85%! www.balancebodyblueprintclkbank.com/affiliate-page https://greatest-trends.com/best-weight-loss-products/balance-body-blueprint-101-weight-loss-tips/
Thats going to need a fansite )))
the jealousy is dripping off your poor sad post. just mad you missed out on making millions, huh? my bitcoin visa card is fucking loaded, you fucking chump.
What is the Labouchere System in Blackjack? , How labouchere?
Labouchere effectiveness http://www.affwl.com/blackjack/what-are-the-labouchere-system-in-blackjack.html
Yeah, but there are many things that are characteristics of some animals, e.g. mice, that don't apply to people. So it's useful info to say that this protein is also present in people. (They didn't say it was present in all animals, maybe it isn't.)
With Android, you can go to any local shop and have it done same day or even while you wait. And they'll actually fix your own phone and never hand you someone else's refurbished phone.
With Android comes more choice. Sure, most of these same shops repair iPhones too - but if you pick the wrong part to replace, a future software upgrade could brick your phone.
Exactly this. Anyone who thinks Bitcoin is an investment or store of value is an idiot. The only value Bitcoin could have is if it actually worked as a currency (except it doesn't). The underlying technology is actually rather impressive and I suspect some other cryptocurrency will eventually fulfil the promise of Bitcoin (despite what some of the extreme detractors say, because a currency doesn't require an underlying value, the value can be simply in providing a medium of exchange).
Everyone is subject to the same laws regardless of how much money they have.
Yes. It's equally illegal for the billionaire and the pauper to sleep under a bridge.
That is how a fucking free market works.
I'm a big fan of the free market, and I have to say it seems like you don't know the first thing about how it works.
>"Comcast engineers independently created our X1 products and services, "
Um, I guess she doesn't know how these patents work. It doesn't matter HOW it was developed/created. Could be from nothing, could have been by people who never heard of the features before, could be in a clean room, could be a 100% copy of some established product. A patent is not a copyright.
Love TiVo, hate some long physical patents, absolutely hate all software patents (also hate long copyrights, especially on obsolete/abandoned stuff), hate Comcast. Hmm, I am certainly conflicted
sought-after tourist is a cave. Cave can be a result of natural and man-made
processes. This is unfortunate because the cave is a huge potential in terms of both
aesthetics and biological richness or biodiversity. This potential can provide great
benefits to the surrounding community as well as for Indonesia
Well, technically there is a way to actively kill bitcoin and it's ilk basically get it banned world wide and it works like this. You create an energy backed cryptocurrency. This cryptocurrency is issued by energy corporations and is basically backed by kWh https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.... So whether they are oil, coal, gas, nuclear, wind, solar, tidal, hydroelectric, they all are enabled to sell energy futures, they future supply of kWh of energy as that krypto currency, not just any energy but a priority of supply, free of corrupting intervention, have your kWh of cryptocurrency from a registered corporation and you have your energy, either directly or indirectly via trading with other corporations. There would be variations in value of the kWh because obviously oil is harder to use than electricity, so electricity would have the highest dollar value.
This allows energy companies to trade energy generation risk, so oil companies can trade their coins against hydroelectric, at what ever the exchange rate is. Individuals would also be able to invest ie buying coins to invest in future energy purchases, either directly or trading. So you now have a backed crypto currencies, competing against unbacked crypto currencies. You should be able to see where this is heading.
This allows the fossil fuellers to offset future losses as a result of the growing undesirability of their energy source by trading it for other energy source cryptocurrencies, which is currently of enormous concern. Why does it kill bitcoin because the fossil fuellers loath competition and to make their coin look way better ie backed with the future value of energy, could be quite a useful investment for the right energy types versus shitty cryptocurrency backed by nothing but marketing, basically pretty much pretend hot air (they don't have any actual hot air to trade).
So energy futures cryptocurrencies issued by corporations on a regulated exchange, to balance out future energy disruptions, would kill marketing based unbacked crypto currencies. You could of course still trade those on the sly and because they are backed, they could make real coins with an embedded chip which validates the coin, not cheap, those coins would be around the hundred to a thousand dollar range at initial issue. Some people want that investment in their hands, not in the hands of traders who when they seem to have enough, always get raided by insiders 'er' outsiders, yeah prove it, they have the millions now or is it nothing now. Energy backed cryptocurrencies will kill unbacked cryptocurrencies and they will do it on purpose via lobbyists, you have been warned.
Freedom of speech means that you absolutely do have a right to be offended, and to express that offense. No one has to listen to you, but you have a right to speak about the issue.
Anyway, I don't think anyone is really offended here, just frustrated that they can't solve this engineering challenge.
small ISPs no spying
lol. That's adorable. I never expected to see this kind of naivete on Slashdot.