Yep, and Hagnagy has already been banned or dis-invited from other security conferences. BHIS even pulled out of a conference they had confirmed attendance on, citing the fact that Hadnagy had been sneaked onto the schedule.

There's a strange line that these entities are straddling where they won't reveal any details of a complaint, but will cite the policy which a partner has allegedly violated. If defcon just said "We won't be working with Chris any more do to creative differences" or the like, it would be hard to argue defamation, but generally claiming harassment without any detail is still defamation if they can't demonstrate that it's true.

Hadnagy claims that defcon leadership didn't talk to him about what problems they had, and he still doesn't know the person or the nature of the complaint: https://www.social-engineer.or...

I know reading the articles is passe, but you could at least notice this is a thread about Linux, not darwin or whatever apple is calling their faux open source unix base these days.

Shift+Ins works in many contexts where Ctrl+V won't.

You can't even scroll terminal output without Shift+PgUp so it's hard to imagine doing without at least some of the function keys in a dev/test environment.

Sad thing is, a lot of the smaller keyboard layouts could still have these less-used keys available if they had decent macros, but most have only entirely useless functions connected to the "Fn" key, and no capacity to configure others.

Yeah, they were queuing repairs for months leading many to attempt the DIY fixes which wouldn't work long-term due to cracked solder balls. Then they'd deny warranty repairs based on their illegal "warranty void" stickers.

This was of course after months of lies about how the defect only impacted some tiny percentage of overall systems which kept climbing to match some small fraction of what users were experiencing.

Still after all that Microsoft remains a large player in the market segment is a mystery. Customers must really enjoy being abused.

Intel ended support for Ivy Bridge and older processors in 2018 when they failed to create a new IGP driver for windows "10" 1803, although Ivy Bridge was only practically replaced in late 2014 when Haswell processors finally became generally available, meaning approximately 3 years of support.

Today's announcement terminating support for Comet Lake which isn't even 3 years old and is still being sold in new systems seems a bit extreme. It's really up to Microsoft whether they decide to kill the old drivers by changing models again.

The concept that prevents most reviews from being about performance, battery life, or other objective criteria is mostly due to this concept. When a computing OEM makes the decision to buy an intel or AMD platform they buy the whole thing: the chipset, processor, IGP and power target decision is already made for them.

Other broad stroke decisions are also made like is this a "desktop replacement" or the much more popular standard ultrabook? While a big maker can divert and make something of a less popular form factor they very rarely do.

This leaves most of the differences between laptops with the things that you touch and look at; keyboard, touchpad, and monitor quality making up the bulk of the difference of experience. This review could have pointed out that Dell's XPS line is a disaster that's not even part of their professional series, but instead they try to make it sound as if an immature platform with a better processor overrides all of the more tangible advantages.

So would you give up all those advantages of a high quality matte screen, a keyboard that doesn't break after a few hours of use, and a lower power target for a processor that's 15% faster in geekbench? https://www.cpu-monkey.com/en/...

There are also risks with unfermented grapes however. Higher sugar content, and a smooth taste that doesn't encourage slow consumption isn't exactly good for blood sugar.

It's probably not the alcohol that makes grapes healthy, or the sugar but the phyto-nutrients in the skins.

Closest you'll get to something like that would be the t700 project which puts a tiger lake board/cpu inside a thinkpad t60 chassis for around $1200 USD.

Hard to justify IMO, but an interesting project nonetheless: https://www.xyte.ch/t700-crowd...

The price is high because they can't buy production runs on the same scale as bigger players. Even there, I don't know how someone can justify paying over $1000 for a basic laptop with soldered ram.

Dish spent $1.4M buying the Boost Mobile MVNO that exclusively resold access to Sprint's network. They told the FCC that they had a plan to build out their own network, but its become clear that was either not true, or the task of building an entire wireless network within 2 years was too hard.

https://www.fiercewireless.com...

30/27mbit/s is actually enough to deliver a reasonably high quality compressed 1080 video stream, even for fast action. The reason the other services suck is they're massively under-provisioned. They probably assume most cloud gaming users are coming from mobile or console exclusive background, so a minor upgrade is all that's necessary to hook users, but then somehow fail to deliver even that.

I really wish we could figure out why this failed business plan keeps getting pushed though.

Yeah, good luck getting a rape conviction secured inside 9 months with the criminally incompetent "justice" system though.

How do you handle this problem if there's no conviction, does the woman get to perform the abortion in the interim, but then get convicted for illegal abortion after the alleged rapist gets off due to prosecutorial misconduct, or you know for actually being demonstrably innocent?

Exactly correct. As others have pointed out, responding to court orders doesn't make Google money, but they're also under no obligation to keep the data (prior to any exacting request), and the amount of money wasted responding to subpoenas would be significantly lower if they could just blanket respond with "we have nothing".

The most likely reason Google maintains identifiable user data is for these government entity requests made outside the confines of the law, but under color of such.

Once google starts accepting money from the government they become a public actor, and are subject to the same rules. The liability for misuses does largely stay attached to the government entities requesting that information though.

This moves the question to something along the lines of "if you searched for an address of a house that was burned down while logged into a public library computer, should the police receive your information"?

The narrow scope of this request would probably justify this case, where other queries made to google along the lines of "all people without 100 miles of this gps position on specified date" would clearly be in violation.

It means that the EPA can only use delegated authority to regulate things they're actually authorized to regulate in said delegation.

IIRC, the courts have already upheld these types of delegations, despite the routine responsibility failures of agencies who are delegated authority.

Being fair to the bureaucrats, it's likely that the elected officials want to avoid accusations of overreach, thus limiting the authority delegated. Those making the appointments are likely still expecting extreme outcomes with limited authority, placing the unelected officials in a difficult balance.