Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:Still Catching Up (Score 4, Informative) 44

It looks like Intel is still playing catch up in the modem space. Interestingly, it looks like for the 2016 iPhone, Apple is using either the Intel XMM 7360 or the Qualcomm X12. Both of these modems were released in 2015. Qualcomm hasn't shipped a new generation since then, but Intel did release the XMM 7480 in February. It would be interesting to see how much progress Intel has made in a year.

Either way, the fact that Intel's modem exists is good for everyone... except Qualcomm. Without it, Qualcomm would be the only LTE modem supplier. There is no doubt Apple is aware of the Intel modem's shortcomings. My guess is Apple is willing to turn a blind eye to that for the "1st gen" product and use the new revenue as a carrot to get Intel to direct its engineering efforts to the features that Apple wants, probably stuff like CDMA for example.

Not only did Apple know, but there were public discussions about it the very same day that they announced the iPhone 7. I don't have the links in front of me, but some people on Reddit did a very technical overview of the differences between the two modems. the TL;DR version of the story (assuming my memory serves me correctly) is that the Qualcomm chip can handle 4 LTE bands at once and the Intel only two or some such thing. To my knowledge, no cellular network provides speeds that the Qualcomm version of the iPhone 7 can take advantage of that the Intel version cannot. Not to say that will change, but this test is all theoretical anyway. It's lab based.

Comment Re:Unmeasurable results (Score 1) 331

Whereas Trump has settled multiple lawsuits using charity money.

Although in more recent 7 years he hasn't used charity money at all for ANY donations, instead just using it for his own expenses:

You do realize that he's committed *actual* criminal offenses don't you? Perhaps you should avoid mentioning charities, that's a big minefield for your guy Trump.

I don't like the way you're disparaging Clinton. She's committed plenty of crimes herself, Comey just hasn't found anyone at the Attorney General's office that is interested in prosecuting. This is what makes America great - two career criminals running for president!

Comment Re:Too Bad the US Pulled Out (Score 1) 184

It's too bad budget cuts in the US forced JPL to back out of the program. While the US has several spectacular failures, they also have even more successes. The fact that they got the Rube Goldberg landing device for the Curiosity lander to work is an engineering wonder in itself. Hopefully Europe has the same tolerances for learning from mistakes as the US.

[badjokeeel] It sounds to me like JPL pulled out just in time.[/badjokeeel]

Comment Re:A little perspective (Score 1) 435

I asked about why Rhode Island per se had any interest in the election, and you ignored that question. Why are you talking about Rhode Island and not the residents of Rhode Island? Each resident of Rhode Island would have the same vote in a popular vote election as everyone else in California or Alaska. Under the Electoral College system, each resident of Rhode Island has more of a say than each resident of California.

And does this mean anyone cares about Rhode Island? Is it a battleground state? Nobody on the national level seems to care about how I vote, because my state's electoral votes are going to Clinton no matter what. In a popular vote, Clinton would want to keep my state happy to build up a greater margin of victory that might offset losses somewhere else. Even if Rhode Island is seen as a swing state, under how many scenarios are its three electoral votes going to swing the election? Group voting systems like this generally give disproportionate influence to some blocs over others.

House seats are supposed to reflect population. Senate seats are intended to balance states (and Senators were originally selected by the state legislatures).

Did you not even read the first sentence I wrote? Rhode Island needs to have some measure of influence in the presidential elections. And by Rhode Island I mean both the government and its people. Why would you want to belong to a nation that gives you no influence over its national government? You wouldn't. Sure you claim that Rhode Island would benefit from a popular vote but give no real reason how it would benefit anyone to cater to the needs of Rhode Island. Like I've said several times - a federal election would depend almost entirely on the will of the 10 most populous states without the electoral college. That would account for almost 171 million out of 314 million Americans. With the electoral college those 40 states could band together to prevent their neglect. The 10 most populous states only account for 256 out of 538 electoral votes. You cannot guarantee a win in the electoral college system with just the support of 10 states. Remember that the constitution was made to prevent the US from splintering. States are granted all rights not explicitly given to the federal government by the constitution (or reserved to the people). This is the founding fathers recognizing that all regions want to feel like they have a say in what happens to the country.

Comment Re: Hilarious (Score 1) 186

When you have a tablet, you can do things like punch in what defense the other team just used to provide statistical analysis of what the next best play is, or what kind of defense to run if your opponent is doing X often. These are things a coach can know, or have on paper, but the ability to quickly look things up for an effective response or plan is probably very beneficial.

What I don't know, however, is why they would need "connectivity." Why do you need wi-fi operating your iPad or Surface if you have all of the relevant info on the device? If they don't have all the relevant info on the device, what do they need it for?

Um... Live replay, maybe.... Oh, forgot, the NFL is the No Fun League so "No replay for you....." Actually, they are using it for downloading photos and drawing up plays, same as the paper copy.

The NHL has gone to live reply on tablets this season. Saw it being used during the Pittsburgh game a couple of nights ago.

The San Jose Sharks coaching staff has been using tablets at the bench for probably 8-10 years now.

Comment Re:A little perspective (Score 1) 435

Why are you concerned about the influence of states in Presidential elections? Rhode Island is not its own group mind. It just contains a lot of voters, and a popular election would give each voter an equal say in the election. As it is, my vote for President is meaningless, since I don't live in a swing state. I don't think that's fair, myself.

Because Rhode Island needs influence in the election or presidential candidates (incumbents included) will tend to not really care about the state. If the state is ignored by everyone but its own senators then why would they want to even bother being a part of the union? The way that house seats and electoral votes was doled out was to balance the needs of low population states versus densely populated states. Just because they have a low population doesn't mean that they add no value to the nation.

Comment Re:Well, there goes the 4th Amendment again... (Score 1) 204

Yes. That's exactly what I said:

You exactly contradicted yourself.

No. I said the license plate does not identify the car. I said it could be used for probable cause to initiate a search for the VIN. That is not contradicting myself. The license plate does not identify the vehicle. period. You know that VIN stands for "Vehicle Identification Number", right?

Comment Re:I hope Apple Pay will die (Score 1) 284

Apple Pay does not use the card nor require its presence during the transaction. It does not pass or use your credit card number either. The code it uses is specific to the device and it's relationship to accounts and you is known only to the issuing bank. Any system that relies on the card and a pin still exposes your account number and your identity, does it not?

EMV over NFC can do the same sort of card number tokenization that Apple pay uses. You can't replay an EMV NFC transaction, the best you could hope to do is intercept it and process it before the legitimate request goes through.

Comment Re:I hope Apple Pay will die (Score 1) 284

Apple Pay doesn't charge the merchants at all. It's the card issuers who pay Apple and they are will to do so because Apple Pay is much more secure than their own systems - chips and strips. It saves the banks money because it drastically reduces the fraud rate. So, no consumers are not paying for this. Another feature of Apple Pay (and Google's version) is that you aren't tied to a bank, a credit card (VISA, MC, etc.). That's what the banks don't like. They want to own the relationship.

Apple Pay is, on the whole, no more secure than EMV NFC. At least not for a card present scenario. It's a little more secure for online purchases.

Comment Re:Well, there goes the 4th Amendment again... (Score 1) 204

This is one of those issues that "seems" like a good idea at first, but, has some negative implications.

My wife worked as a fundraising coordinator and worked with different vendors to sell (or give away) gift cards to people. Since we share a car, there have been many times that I was driving around with a box of gift cards (100? 200? something like that) in the trunk, etc.

You're looking at this rather myopically, as if it was just the gift cards that made the search reasonable. Already you've said - you have the gift cards in a box in the trunk. The passenger of the vehicle was being arrested for an outstanding warrant. As the officer was getting the passenger out of the vehicle he noticed a little bag that was partially hidden in the crevice between the center console and the car seat. That immediately looks like the passenger, who is lawfully under arrest, was trying to hide something prior to his arrest. That immediately raises reasonable suspicion.

I expect this situation happens quite a bit since many vendors work with fundraising coordinators to sell gift cards, etc to raise money for their causes.

If I got stopped for speeding, having the cards be confiscated (so they could later be scanned), with potentially myself being potentially being "held" for 72 hours while that is being done by an outside agency isn't exactly something that I should have to think about.

And why should you think about it? You've already said they are in a box in the trunk. I have never had a police officer ask me what is in a sealed container in my vehicle during a terry stop. Why would they? They have asked me if I am carrying a weapon. They have asked me for my identification. But they generally don't give a damn about anything else. As soon as you start making them suspicious, they start asking more questions. If you decided to let them search the car and they found the gift cards in the trunk, then your explanation of your wife's charitable work would likely suffice. However you have to realize that preloaded cards are used to launder money. It's going to raise suspicion. What you really need to worry about is civil asset forfeiture. What they'll likely do is assume that the gift cards are ill gotten gains and will just take the cards and let you go. Then you'll spend months trying to reclaim that money and will likely never get all of it back. That IS wrong, and very reprehensible. But questioning someone who has 143 cards to see if they have a plausible story and then doing more digging after they can't come up with anything reasonable? I see no problem with it.

In my case, there would be nothing wrong - however, it would be a serious inconvenience! I should be able to carry large amounts of cash, gift cards, etc without getting interrogated, as there can be legitimate reasons to do so (although, most people aren't likely to do so!)

Of course you should. But if you had a bag of $100 bills sitting in your front seat at a traffic stop - be prepared to be questioned. While legal it is not normal. You just admitted that you would consider this situation to be odd yourself.

Realistically, this situation wouldn't happen to someone that didn't have other issues (the people in the article had an outstanding warrant, which made it far more likely those cards weren't legitimate in the LEO's eyes), but that isn't the point. Warrantless searches in my mind should only be for "emergency" situations where there is a clear and present danger (someone locked in a trunk, clear smell of decaying human flesh, etc.)

This is also ignoring the fact that the way the gift cards are designed should be changed to prevent issues like this and the POS system should alert the store so they can call the authorities when people try to use the "stolen" cards.

Unfortunately for crooks, until you have the constitution amended, what they did was safely covered under reasonable suspicion and probable cause. Remember that they have an obligation to preserve any obvious evidence when they arrest someone. The driver was not under warrant and would have been free to go if they hadn't left the bag of gift cards in sight.

As for the cards themselves, you'll never be able to prevent them from being cloned so long as they have a magnetic stripe. But we all know how everyone here in the US loves chip cards.

Comment Re:Well, there goes the 4th Amendment again... (Score 1) 204

In fact, the police do not use the license plate at all to identify a stolen vehicle.

Not once they're out of their vehicles and looking for it up close, but of course they use the license plate to identify stolen vehicles. At least, potential ones. When they get closer, they can use the VIN.

Yes. That's exactly what I said:

They might use the plate to stop someone with probable cause

Comment Re:Well, there goes the 4th Amendment again... (Score 1) 204

I agree with everything you say about the gift cards, but that is not the problem. The article stated it was an opaque bag that was spotted, not 143 gift cards. Unless the warrant of passenger had something to do with an illegal activity the could involve hiding stuff inside small opaque bags the how could there be reasonable suspicion? From my experiences with the courts, the only reason they defendants didn't win getting the search thrown out is that they did have enough money for a good attorney.

It was a reasonable search because the person who was sitting next to the gift card bag was being arrested. It appeared that the person being arrested attempted to hide the bag and failed. At that point a reasonable person would be suspicious of the contents of the bag. And it's the kind of reasonable suspicion that a police officer could easily articulate and a normal person would reasonably understand.

Comment Re:Well, there goes the 4th Amendment again... (Score 1) 204

why do you guys keep raising the issue of the AMOUNT of cards?

did the judge declare that the 4th ammendment is null and void if you have 'too many' of something?

now, go ahead: define EXACTLY what 'too many' is.

THAT is my point.

this is bullshit. the law was not followed and a new crap law was essentially created to help cops fuck people over at-will.

carrying 'too many cards' is not a crime. it does not matter what the cards are or any other details.

soon, carrying 'too much money' will be a crime. oops, forgot, they ALREADY declared that a crime ;(

I weep for us all. we don't respect laws anymore; we seem to do anything to make authoritarians happier. citizens - they don't really matter anymore, do they?

The amount matters because the police are allowed to search the car and the gift cards with probable cause. The validity of the search is based on the sum total of things taking place at the time of the search. They arrested the passenger of the car for an outstanding warrant. As they arrested him, they noticed that it looked like he was trying to hide evidence of a further crime (bag partially hidden next to his seat). They pull out the card and see an extremely unusual number of gift cards. They ask the owner of the vehicle if they were lawfully purchased. The owner of a vehicle says he bought them from some random guy. I mean, did you read the article? The whole exchange is suspicious as hell. At that point the officer is within the law when he attempts to determine whether or not the property is stolen. There are at least a half a dozen plausible reasons for someone to have that many gift cards but the way the person claimed they were obtained, combined with the fact that they attempted to hide them, and that one of them was already being arrested lead to a legal search.

Comment Re:Well, there goes the 4th Amendment again... (Score 1) 204

The information on a license plate is in plain view. The data on a magnetic strip is not.

You may not be able to tell that a car is stolen just from the license plate. In fact, the police do not use the license plate at all to identify a stolen vehicle. They might use the plate to stop someone with probable cause, but they will look at the VINs stamped on the engine block, the dashboard, inside the driver's door, and anywhere else that is required to properly identify the car.

Slashdot Top Deals

If at first you don't succeed, you must be a programmer.