Re: pictures
On my (non-Apple) phone there's a setting for that but I suspect "No, Dave. I can't let you do that." may be all you hear on an I-Phone that's your plastic glass-covered pal that's fun to be with™
13428 publicly visible posts • joined 16 Apr 2007
To be fair, even with these fuckups, the planes still have a great record. But the real problem is the politically engineered lack of competition. Airbus is snowed under with orders and would probably face similar problems if it tried to scale up production to get even more. For decades the US plane makers didn't have to worry about competition until the European airlines finally got the planes they wanted and Airbus became a success. Consolidation and a duopoly were considered the only way to preserve profit margins jobs and US airlines were strongarmed into continuing to buy Boeing. Though, to be fair, if some of them had the choice, they'd buy the cheapest, crappiest things out there because most US airlines hate passengers that can't be transported in boxes.
Please put the IPv6-only strawman away. No one's suggesting that. This was a flaw in IPv6 and one of the things that held greater IPv6 adoption back. Networks still have work to do but many places are now moving to islands of IPv4 in a sea of IPv6. My ISP has been IPv6 for years but it also provides the 6to4 gateway for me and everyone else so that we don't have to care much.
When IPv6 was being developed the shortage was indeed artificial but it is very real now. Your proposed fix wouldn't even work for India… let alone the rest of Asia. No need to worry, America, you've got all the addresses you could ever need and, as it was America that invented the internet, that's all that really matters. (Let's ignore all the work done by those outside the US to make the internet actually work).
As for country codes: what have you been smoking? That is exactly the sort of thing that would allow the internet to be broken up by those countries that think not all packets should be created equal!
Your revisionism is clear: if assignments were not supposed to be permanent we'd have seen reassignment as soon as the internet took off in Asia and it was obvious the tiny pool. There may have been no intention to make ip addresses commercial property, but the effect, known also as the tragedy of the commons, in making them so, was only a matter of time. You're also ignoring the tweaks to IPv6 that have been made as it has been adopted, not least the acceptance of the need for smooth transition. This means that we'll probably still see IPv4 networks for many years to come, though they'll become increasingly isolated as the networks around them adjust to new demands, but everything will generally continue to work.
But, of course, you're right let's ignore the manifest problems and just insist on more and more NAT as the only way that doesn't break the existing internet, except when it does!
Like I said, not enough addresses left to redistribute, even it sounds like a lot. You're also being revisionist. Sure, if we could go back to the 1970s and 1980s, reassignments, at least of company blocks would have been possible. But, by the time, IPv4 addresses scarcity became a thing, the financial possibilities were becoming clear and very few companies were prepared to give adddresses back.
I'm not claiming IPv6 is perfect, but I also don't think it's as bad as many make out, and it wasn't quite the gravy train I think you're suggesting: there have been more egregious examples of that with W3C springing to mind.
It's taken a while, but I think we now have enough people pursuing a pragmatic migration that isn't going to cause obscure and poorly maintained networks in key areas (hospitals are one area with infamously outdated kit) to fail suddenly because IPv4 was switched off. And this should be the blueprint for future changes, though I suspect the lessons about ownership will be some of the first to be forgotten.
I think consumer-land is moving more and more to IPv4 but providers are using 6to4 gateways for a seamless transition. The avoids the need for expensive and tricky carrier-grade NAT and will allow more parts of the internet to move to IPv6 without anybody noticing. And a smooth transition suits everyone.
I don't follow your arguments. It's not the IETF that allocated the IPv4 blocks and the suggestions to move to IPv6 are based on a lot more than just scarce IPv4 addresses. Furthermore, making IPv4 addresses free is what got us to this mess in the first place. It was national regulators, especially the US, that led to an undervaluing of the resource and the incredibly skewed distribution of addresses mainly to US institutions and companies, who are now cashing in on this largesse. There are now more devices than IPv4 addresses so a redistribution, apart from being technically potentially as challenging as moving to IPv6 wouldn't solve the problem.
That's interesting point and I'll admit to not having bothered to do enough research to get all the details, but biggest problems have always been with iPlayer TS -> MP4, which is really just a different container. I might take the time to compare TS, MP4 (reencoded, VBR), MP4 (CBR). But, OTOH, the greater bandwidth is noticeable for all library operations.
I think it's possible to think that Sun trashed Java and a takeover by someone like Oracle was inevitable, once Java had become "essential" for some companies. I'm not thinking necessarily that McNealy didn't maximise returns for shareholders, it's arguable he did because companies kept buying Sun hardware to run Java, but stewardship was a real problem. Going either fully commercial or transferring the language to a foundation would have removed a lot of uncertainty for many.
Since Oracle's takeover it's at least clearer for companies what they're facing, especially since IBM bought RedHat and thus JBoss the biggest alternative runtime, which RedHat had already locked down. This has also made it easier for companies to consider alternatives, as they also did with databases: there's no doubt that Oracle's purchase of MySQL via the Sun acquisition was the best thing that ever happened to Postgres.
For me the big step up is the RPi 4 because the USB-2.0 bus is very slow for data transfer. I mainly use the RPi for Kodi and have consistently had playback problems that are almost entirely down to bandwidth: h264 performance itself was fine on the RPi1 but I've had problems with audio and synchronisation on every generation until the RPi4. I realise this is a trivial example but I can imagine similar problems in other projects with a lot of data transfer. For embedded stuff with little or no data or network activity, the older ones are fine.
How is this supposed to work? The only thing I can think like this has ever worked, is the restrictions on copiers and printers in the way deal with bank notes. Not that this stopped counterfeiting.
The models and the knowledge required to make them are out there, there's no sending the tide back out. But you could use existing legislation about people's right to their own image to enforce take down notices and fines. But only in countries that have such legislation: tough luck America.
I remember years ago that the process of taking notes (which require cognitive processing of what was said or shown) followed by reading and then expanding, led to best knowledge retention over time. Taking notes on paper is also far less distracting that using a machine and notebooks can be nice and small. I suspect that at some point, I might move to an e-reader that does notes, but these are apparently still a bit slow. In the meantime, I tend to be pretty good at remembering when something interesting happenend and can normally find it very quickly.
And taking a little extra time to develop handwriting that is legible, at least to oneself, is a skill worth having. My tip: avoid using biros, the pressure and friction are really uncomfortable. Pencils, rollerbarlls or fountain pens are much, much easier to write with.
I'd prefer to go back to the golden days of British Leyland… Triumph Acclaim, the awful Austin thingy and strikes! Cars you couldn't drive from people who wouldn't work and at all a price designed to bankrupt the country!
Hm, I quite like that as a slogan and might use in my election campaign. It makes about as much sense as the rest!
I think the issue is trying to land a craft accurately in low gravity. This is probably some kind of mutlilemma™ with accuracy, speed and stability just a few of the parameters. Speed might the real problem because this is from orbit on a body without an atmosphere. It landed well but with considerable momentum in a low inertia environment: things topple more easily in low gravity. Self-righting devices are all well and good, but from the country that gave us origami, I'd be looking for a more holistic concept around the centre of gravity. After all, why not try and make use of that extra kinetic energy?
Given the low gravity, I think we have consider comparative masses as much as raw power here.
Any attempts are likely to be given to engineers with spare time on their hands to work out how future rovers might include self-righting equipment. But, as long, as there's power, why not try some of them?
It'll probably apply to other countries that are aligned with EU legislation due to the "Brussels effect". Norwary and Switzerland spring to mind but the UK will probably as well: Apple wants to reduce the overhead of dealing with multiple legislations and most countries, including the UK, have a concept of regulatory equivalence. This might mean minor changes in the blurb so that national courts are happy to enforce, but the effect will be the same.
Of course, BoJo might have another "oven-ready" deal in his briefcase…
So, no sales growth because we're working on the "next great thing", or the thing we didn't plan for in an industry that is notoriously cyclical and you have to have multiple generations of models on the go all the time. Then there's the idea of licensing the bits that we do have (charger network, autopilot crap, etc.) as if the competition can't build better mousetraps once you show them how.
I can't wait for someone to call a credit note on this house of cards, which has a joker as king.
The European, and especially the German, car industry only has itself to blame. For decades it pleaded for incentives for larger, heavier vehicles with bigger profit margins. Like the US in the 1960s and 1970s.
Chinese electric cars will sell well because, at the moment, they are the better electric cars. But, just their like Japanese and Korean predecessors, they will need to set up European plants to succeed over time.
Not betting against their engineering skills or ingenuity, but I do think there is a systemic risk. Accidents were fairly common in the West until we developed the no-blame, safety-first culture. It's very, very had to see this happening in a country where the party effectively is both regulator and regulated.
Don't forget: Congress put the FAA under pressure to accept self-certification. After all, why should the taxpayer pay for engineers who know what they're doing to do the work when you can get the companies to do it "for free".
Isn't Conflict of Interest the new Dan Brown novel book?
The real change was the shift to all IP with 4G. 5G was dreamed up by marketeers (from the Sirious Cybernetics Corporation no less!) to try and drum up demand for new handsets with the rollout on networks designed to be done as and when it makes sense for operators, becaue it's really just infrastructure, a bit like improved asphalt for roads.
The next decade is due to flash past full of lots of hopefully problem-free upgrades to networks that we'll hardly notice but which, over time, will make a difference.
The Apollo programme was amazing but it benefitted from a limitless budget and the "no-blame" culture that was being established in the aviation industry. Lots of mistakes were made, some of catastrophic, but lessons were learned without turning people into pariahs. This, in turn, inspired many projects and engineers, including some in Silicon Valley.
Japan it seems has managed to do most of the remaining 10% of getting to the moon: landing exactly where you want to and in one piece. Now it just has to conquer the final bit: and the right way up.
Wouldn't work for me, have to be thigh side-pockets. But I also have a mount for longer journey 'cos I use the phone to navigate.
But jeans? On a bike? You can't be going far because that double-seam is designed to hurt. Gave up jeans years ago as impractical for everyday use. They're okay as work clothes when others are not available.
Haven't put a phone in a trouser pocket for decades: try cycling like that. Shirt or jacket pocket but needs to be able to operated with one hand. Otherwise, silly money for these toys! The Samsung A series or its keenly priced Chinese competitors do all I need from a phone apart from wireless charging.
See what's on the market in a couple of years…
I think that this particular bit of the law is fairly new: it was revised a few years ago to make all hacking attempts illegal unless you have permission. This includes pen testing. :-(
However, there have also been improvements on how companies are expected to protect data, especially "personally identifiable data" which the company has clearly breached. Provision has also been made for whistleblowers.
I'd expect this decision to passed up the courts until some experts are involved: the company can't get away with this kind of incompetence. Whether they can sue for reputational damage is another matter but I suspect they'll be advised to settle to avoid making their own reputation for incompetence if not negligence even more widely known.
While I think you're overdoing it a bit, you do have a point. There is a lot to admire in Teslas, there has been some great engineering work, but there have also been lots of corners cut. For many owners they're like enormous I-Phones so changing them every couple of years isn't an issue but the mass market might think otherwise. Unfortunately, the stock market doesn't think.
I suspect there's a problem with definitions: a proper fuel cell should provide the energy of combustion but at greater efficiency because the chemical process is essentially the same just slowed down. In the meantime, I'm all for ICEs running e-fuels over EVs everywhere with not a charger in sight: network and generation capacity will probably never be enough.
As I said, batteries are being used because they're "good enough" but the energy density is never ever going to be sufficient to compete with hydrocarbon or ammonia fuels. The problem with being good enough is that they're also sucking up much of the attention and capital.