What is laughable is that you are so smug in your total ignorance of the geologic history of this planet.
To quote another
Regardless of where you fall in the long-running debate between keyboard/mouse and analog stick controls, you could historically be relatively sure that everyone on a single platform would be playing with the same control scheme. Recently, though, third-party adapters have started allowing console players to use a mouse and keyboard effectively on dedicated consoles, throwing off the competitive balance in a way that Overwatch director Jeff Kaplan doesn't appreciate.
"The Overwatch team objects to the use of mouse and keyboard on console," Kaplan wrote on the Battle.net forums. "We have contacted both first-party console manufacturers and expressed our concern about the use of mouse and keyboard and input conversion devices.
Accidentally moderated "offtopic" instead of "insightful" - posting here to undo moderation.
Mine was a 286 without a hard drive. We called loading anything on that machine doing the "diskette disco".
We bought a 40MB hard drive some years later, as an upgrade.
Maybe msmash could find the same article on a more reputable site, like Buzzfeed or CNN.
Easy enough. Don't Anonymous Cowards have google?
Sure they do, and I assume they know how to use it. This doesn't change the fact that the summary didn't include them because the editors were too lazy to put them there.
Damn, ran out of mod points. Where's a -1, Factually Incorrect when you need one?
(See subsequent replies...)
I tend to agree. But with a million signatures, he can't exactly ignore it, either.
Assume you're right (you're not, but humour me...) - data, once the cabling is laid, costs nothing to transmit.
You happily saturate every link you have, and every upstream link as well, because of course, it's free, right?
Now I come along and offer to pay whoever gave you the link some amount of money - let's say $1000/mo. So they give me the link instead of you.
Now, if you want to use that link again, you'll have to beat my $1000/mo. So I guess it's no longer free to you - it will cost you at least as much as I am willing to pay for it.
Is this measure meant for complete imbeciles or I'm missing something here? What if I'm a real terr orist? I will either specify no social profile at all, or specify the one meant for fooling everyone.
Ah, I get it, it's not about terrorism. It's about pilfering taxpayer money. Oh, and it's about security theater as well. As if more people die of terrorism than people on the roads
Not quite. This is about collecting even more information in the ever greater and ever more futile attempt to profile everyone they can, because everyone knows this is about as "voluntary" as DHS roadside screenings. They're fully aware that nobody with malicious intent will divulge anything that could deny them entry. People coming from countries that tend to generate terrorists aren't even included in this. This is only for countries for which a visa waiver exists - in other words, places America has deemed as "safe"; this is a dead giveaway that this has nothing to do with catching terrorists. This is about collecting and cataloguing information for all those individuals who don't appear on their usual radars.
Also, you can bet your bottom dollar that many people who have otherwise anonymous profiles will enter this information willingly, granting more information to agencies which might not have drawn these connections before. What they're planning to do with this data, how they're planning to use it, is anyone's guess. They sure seem to think that it will help, and they're not so stupid as to believe this will actually help catch "terrorists". This is an information grab, pure and simple, and the fucks in charge of it don't see what's wrong with collecting all of this shit from everyone.
Personally, I stopped visiting the States years ago. The border agents have done a splendid job of making me feel unwelcome there. There are plenty of other places in the world to spend my tourist dollars that don't automatically assume I am the enemy, collect my social media profiles and fingerprints, and grope me like a horny teenager every time I visit.
Second, if the iPhone is running iOS 8, remember that the iPhone 4S didn't have a Secure Enclave and Touch ID sensor. The Secure Enclave is a coprocessor that utilizes a secure boot process to make sure that it's uncompromized. It has a secret unique ID not accessible by the rest of the phone, Apple or anyone -- it's like a private key. The phone generates ephemeral keys (think public keys) to talk with the Secure Enclave. They only work with the unique ID to encrypt and decrypt the data on the coprocessor.
I fail to see how this rather technical (to the layperson) information improves the article in any way. How does extolling the security of newer devices improve this? It doesn't have whatever doodad (the secure enclave) you're talking about - so why include all this useless (imho) information in the article at all?
It's a pretty crap article really, spending over half its time talking about stuff that has nothing to do with the subject at hand, not to mention the subpar proofreading.
There's no link to any story here... do I just google it, or am I expected to know where to find it?
Any sufficiently advanced bug is indistinguishable from a feature. -- Rich Kulawiec