Comment Re:How Soon Until... (Score 1) 115
A datajack? You are clearly lacking courage.
A datajack? You are clearly lacking courage.
Do you have to actually use the watch or is it possible to sell it back the moment you receive it?
In the U.S., the software is the *ONLY* thing not made in China.
That's because it is made in India.
Firefox OS is free software.
If Google wanted it, they would have picked it up like they picked Webkit.
The CA model is broken.
The fundamental difference between a CA and a web of trust is that in a CA model, only the CA signs your certificate while in a WoT, the certificate can be signed by as many signers as you want, which mean you don't have a single point of failure.
For example StartCom may not be worth your entire trust but it is still better than nothing. And complimented by, say, a few independent, free authorities, it starts getting good because the attacker now have several different targets. This is not an option with CA as we have now, that's blind trust or nothing.
The C-- I know was intended as a portable assembly, mostly for compilers to use as an intermediate language. No "come from" or "do for a while" ala intercal but a variety of low level operations and a low level type system.
I found it interesting but it never took off.
You leak my personal information, you're a CXX, you go to jail for 2 years.
CXX? Are
And while leaks can sometimes be traced to bugs in source files, jailing them is not the solution. Jailing the running process may be a good idea though, but it is better do it before it starts leaking data.
You know the old joke where the curator of the monastery came up from the vault with the original texts and cried "Dammit, in the original it read 'celebRate'!"
Or the first line of the Bible, saying "The story, all names, characters, and incidents portrayed in this production are fictitious. No identification with actual persons, places, buildings, and products is intended or should be inferred."
Pokemon go doesn't eat that much data.
Battery on the other hand...
What's wrong with fantasizing about 20-30 year old women when you are 10-15? They are in peak physical shape and have experience. Biologically, that's the ideal age for child bearing, something, we, as a specie, associate with "sexy".
Fantasies are an ideal. And what's more normal a straight male to fantasize about women the ideal age.
And about virtual child porn, my stance is that as long as no kid is harmed, anything goes.
In fact true pedophiles have a skewed perception of sexiness, they just don't find the right category of person attractive. Kind of like homosexuals in fact. The difference is while homosexuals can (now) happily do as they like because they are consenting adults, pedophiles can't, the relationship is asymmetrical and will always be.
To cope with this, pedophiles can turn to crime, or find substitutes. Substitutes can be virtual child porn, young looking adults, age play, etc... In fact there are probably millions of pedophiles you never heard of, simply because they know how to deal with their desires without harming anyone. But if you criminalize everything innocuous that could make a pedophile jack off, it is no wonder they end up as criminals.
I remember a friend delivering a phone book to a boiler.
The reason : the boiler was connected to a phone line, probably for remote control. And because at that time, when you had a landline, a phone book was sent to the subscriber's address, the boiler had its phone book too.
Free.fr, a french ISP notorious for bringing low cost internet doesn't charge a rental fee for its "boxes" and using any other hardware is not supported.
In a lawsuit related to the non-disclosure of some open source components, they argued that the freebox (that's the name of the modem) is part of their network and that the customer has nothing to do with it. IIRC, they lost, but I can see Charter pulling the same argument.
Germany has plenty of solar and wind, which have a nasty tendency to give you plenty of power when you don't need it.
H2 production can be seen as way to store that energy, with a much better capacity than batteries.
Was the message transferred FTL?
Nope, because the universe doesn't like it.
In this particular case the problem is that we don't know beforehand which particle is entangled with witch one. Some particles may not be entangled at all. The result is that by measuring his particles, Bob will only get random data.
The only way for him to find the "good" particles is by comparing his measurement with Alice's, but first, Alice has to transmit her results, and this can only be done the "slow" way.
I know there's a black and a white ball in a box. I pick one of them without looking at it and transport it 10km away, then I check what colour it is. Now I also know the colour of the other ball, but is it fair to say that checking the colour "affected" the ball I left in the box over the distance of 10km? Obviously it's absurd. Why would quantum entaglement be any more mysterious than this?
What you describe here it the hidden variable theory, and it has been proven wrong using Bell's theorem.
Quantum entanglement really is mysterious. Mysterious enough to drive Einstein nuts. And while the maths work, there is currently no satisfactory interpretation.
Those who do things in a noble spirit of self-sacrifice are to be avoided at all costs. -- N. Alexander.
