Does this new standard include telemetry to report the Chinese government how it is being used and what data is being transmitted? Does it allow for the display to be remotely disabled if disfavorable content is viewed?

What I see from government procurement of computer systems, it's going to go like this:

* Specifications will be issued 2024
* Appropriation in 2025
* Design in 2026
* Design approval in 2027
* Development starts 2028
* Releases 2031

And in 2031 when it releases, it will (optimistically) be based on 5 year old technology because the design was specified in 2026. The wheels of government grind slowly in the United States. Meanwhile, the rest of the world will have moved on. Why do you think it took so long to kill off IE?

Seems like a good place to dump vitrified radioactive waste.

Desktops as we know them are going away. We are seeing a trend toward increased reliance on mobile devices, even at the desk.

There are two main operating systems on those mobile devices, iOS and Android. Android has about an 80-85% share of the mobile market worldwide. iOS is around 12-18%, depending on who's doing the study.

Five times as many mobile devices as PCs are sold each year.

Android has, at its base, a Linux kernel. Sure, the hardware doesn't look anything like a desktop machine; Android doesn't look like a traditional Linux distribution; the update and application management is different; and the applications are different, but it's still Linux.

When Android and ChromeOS devices become the platform of choice, we will have achieved the Year of Linux on the Desktop. Maybe we already have.

How will this work when Mary calls the helpdesk, and as soon as Victor the desktop tech sits down the screen locks because Mary isn't the one sitting there?

I think the idea is that if you are at your desk but idle (say, for example, you're on a long phone call with your chair tipped back and your feet on the desk), the computer won't lock down after X minutes of inactivity passes. But if you step away, it locks within seconds. You probably want to have some delay before locking, just in case you bend down to tie your shoe or something else where you are out of the view of the camera for a moment.

The problem with the typical timeout we've used for years is that it can leave the desktop vulnerable between the time you leave the computer and the timeout expires. Most places set the timeout to several minutes to avoid employee irritation of having to unlock their computers several times a day, just because they were doing something else even though the computer was never out of their sight. A timeout is, at best, a compromise between security and convenience.

This new method has the potential to improve BOTH security and convenience.

The only people who complained were reviewers on tech sites. Everyone else added weight and bulk by wrapping "protective" shells around their phones.

Just have the study participants floss only half (the same half) of their mouth every day. Monitor their oral health for several years. If flossing makes a significant difference in dental decay, it should become obvious by the differing rate of decay of flossed and unflossed teeth.

It seems to me that this would be a reasonable approach to a study. Aside from flossing, the oral health of each subject should be the same on both sides of the mouth. That means you wouldn't have to account as much for variations in oral hygeine among subjects.

Disclaimer: I have never knowingly conducted or participated in medical research.

How is the Tesla's grammar? Hopefully better than that of this article's writer.

Just think of all the Pokemons spawning at the event attended by hundreds of thousands of people that you'd miss out on!

This controversy would be a non issue if there was an option do not upgrade and don't bug me anymore to upgrade.

There are many industrial processes and machines running ancient hardware. Also common in the medical field.

A local radio station I service (IT) finally replaced an audio editing computer last year. This computer was running Windows 95. Why? A 'bespoke' audio editing card, which required an EISA bus. So why not some other software solution? Because this software did EXACTLY what they wanted to do, was very easy to use, and very easy to train new users on. We maintained an inventory of spare parts -- including a spare motherboard -- to keep the system running.

So why did they replace it? The audio editing card (which was a dedicated computer on a daughter card) began to fail, and that's the part they didn't have a spare for. The replacement product they are using is Adobe Audition.

I know of many other industrial and medical machines that are running old versions of windows on old hardware because they have proprietary software or hardware that is not cost-effective to upgrade (and is working perfectly fine). Some of the software and hardware would be tens of thousands (in some cases hundreds of thousands) of dollars to upgrade -- just to run a more modern OS. If a return on investment cannot be identified, the hardware will not be upgraded.

Apologies for misspelling exercising. Please don't punish me.

It seems that most laws and regulations enacted in the past half century in the United States serve not to punish actual harm done, or the intent to do harm, but to punish the potential to do harm.

Stop it. Already. Unless you can show intent to harm or resultant harm don't punish people for excersising their liberties just because there is potential for harm.

It's like awarding the Nobel Peace Prize on the potential to go good. Or rewarding innovative designs before they are implemented.

I see potential here: strap an accelerometer array (smartphone) to each wrist, and enable typing without a keyboard. Write your next novel tapping away at a blank desk... or even just wiggling your fingers in the air. Sure would be easier than tapping away at a tiny smartphone screen, and you wouldn't have to lug around a BT keyboard.

As for entering PINs, I always have at least three fingers over the keypad at all times, to obfuscate which key is being pressed/tapped. Not foolproof, but maybe makes it just difficult enough for the nefarious person to move on to the next potential victim.