Free playable samplers.
Free playable samplers.
But they still have your data.
Some men also prefer to die in a nursing home - old, decrepit, and can't even retain his bowels, let alone remember his name.
Not sure what kind of a life goal that would be...
For real-time communication?
This is all true if nothing changes.
But what happens if they build a reusable booster that can lift this sort of weight? If Spacex could lift 200mT to LEO for costs that are comparable to today's heavy launches, would new uses arise?
NASA is also building a heavy lift rocket - the SLS. So Spacex is not alone in thinking a big rocket is a good idea. Of course, NASA is responsible to Congress, not the owners of a private company, so that part is different.
The recent Falcon 9 accident has been traced to a Helium COPV tank in the oxygen tank. It runs at more like 5,500 PSI, not 300 PSI. Delamination of COPV in cryogenic applications is a longstanding problem which they must have thought they'd conquered, having used them successfully so many times.
And this article is about an engine, not a composite helium tank. The engine runs on cryogenic methane, which is a new fuel for Spacex, replacing kerosene. They are running scaled tests during the design phase of their new engine - so not exactly building it faster now and hoping to get lucky that it doesn't blow up. The new engine is supposed to be much more efficient than current incarnations and is specifically tuned for use in a vacuum. Plus it has the advantage of using a fuel that can be harvested or manufactured from several locations around the solar system.
...something I could do at home with a low-end shoebox computer (or better yet, an old cast-off box with a little SSD and a big platter drive stuffed into it) that would be incredibly cheaper over time, electricity included.
And wait - who said I had to have the damned thing on 24/7 at home? I boot it when I turn the TV on - takes less time to start up than the TV does these days thanks to SSD *shrug*.
Seriously - if I subscribed to this service, I'd be damned embarrassed to say that I did and claim that I'm a geek at the same time...
At the rate things are going, W10 will become the most successful and rapid malware spread since the old "I love you" email virus of 1999...
(no really, I'm fully willing to wager that, say, at least 50% of the installs were pushed onto an ignorant public who would not have otherwise bothered, 10-20% more were shoved onto machines whose owner consciously wanted no such thing, maybe 10-20% from people who actually wanted the thing, and the rest just showed up on new computers.)
I have to give a big so what. I know we suppose to hate Microsoft and I have no love for Azure. But so what, it is Adobe who will need to deal with the consequences more than the users of the services.
Besides, maybe with a little luck, MSFT will nickel-and-dime Adobe hard-core along the way, and they become victims of the same rental scheme they've inflicted on their own customer base. Couldn't happen to a more deserving company, really.
I was just thinking about this a bit...
I toy around with CG and artistic software, but aside from a (now-ancient) copy of Photoshop, I usually do not bother with Adobe's products anymore precisely because of The Cloud (cue angelic chorals and a deep majestic voice enunciating every syllable...)
Not that I hate the whole cloudy thing per se - it has its use cases... but digital artwork ain't one of them, especially for the hobbyist.
Renting render farm time? Okay, that's a good thing to have. OTOH, Fiddling with pics and CG stills that only your family or some small business will see? Not so much. I already have hella powerful machinery and oceans of storage space at home... the hell do I need to clog up my bandwidth (and in my case, bandwidth allocation thanks to Sat. Internet) just so that Adobe can rent their software instead of buying it?
Just a rant, I guess... but it's astounding how many shops just sucked down the party line and continued shoveling money towards the whole enterprise.
I mean, seriously - the cloud is nothing more than someone else's computer - yet it became one of the biggest buzzwords of the past 10 years... feck.
What if the drones have infrareds and other features?
Do we know anything about what was "lax" at yahoo? I certainly doubt that the lawyers involved in this have the slightest clue if there was any negligence at all involved. Their calculus is "wow, millions of accounts compromised. Let's go class action!
And then I read through the comments here, and there is indignation at such weak security and lax procedures and they shouldn't just be sued they should all be taken out and shot and big corporations are teh evil!!
What we do know is that the hackers targeting the company were "state sponsored". That means that the equivalent of the NSA targeted Yahoo for penetration.
Does Slashdot really think that China's Ministry of State Security doesn't have the resources to hack into your server? Or the Russian FSB? You really don't think they have the resources to penetrate competently implemented security, particularly when an enterprise comprises tens of thousands of people and hundreds of thousands of devices?
For all I know, Yahoo had an intern drive a box of backup tapes with all of the account info unencrypted to the dump and that's how they got hacked. But somehow I think it was a little more sophisticated than that. And my first thought certainly wouldn't be gross negligence.
And I'm pretty sure the lawyers don't have the slightest bit of evidence that it was gross negligence at this point. They just see the size of the whale, and they'll seek to prove their case later. Or just make enough noise to get a big pile of cash to go away.
If they really had something, I'd feel differently. But somehow I doubt they have anything at all at this point
I'll add that the Clinton campaign has been proudly touting its Twitter and social media strategy ahead of the debate. They are happy to tell you that they have their affiliated PACs and supporters coordinated in a campaign to influence debate moderators to "fact check" Trump during the debate, producing an advantage for Clinton.
They also proudly tout their strategy to have an army of supporters and astroturfers alike live-tweet the debate to create the impression that Hillary is winning the debate. They are specifically targetting the reporters and pundits who cover the event to ensure that they get the early buzz as winning the debate and have a quick declaration that "the election is over" following the debate.
This story, with labels like "Shitposting" would appear to be cover for this strategy, designed to neuter any criticism of the Clinton strategy, which has been fairly openly discussed at least since the Matt Lauer national security forum.
So we have moved into a new era of political ground game - where social media is used in increasingly sophisticated ways by the campaigns to influence the election. They both seem relatively hamfisted about it at this point, but that doesn't mean it isn't having an effect.
And a free Yahoo! account.
Machines that have broken down will work perfectly when the repairman arrives.