Posts by doublelayer

Why we abandoned open source: LiveCode CEO on retreat despite successful kickstarter

I don't know about that. Perhaps I'm just too used to the if/then syntax, but I feel it makes more sense in code and in English. We use sentences like that all the time: "If your car isn't going, check the fuel gauge to see if you need to add more". Far from expressing a rule, you're specifying a situation that is possible and what to do under that situation.

I like that syntax in English for most conditional statements. The unless version can get very confusing if things are long. "If you see an alert on the security monitor, first press the acknowledge button, then alert the security station, then contact the police" makes sense. "Press the acknowledge button, then alert the security station, then contact the police if you see an alert" runs the risk that they will miss the important bit at the end which controls whether any of that should be done.

Re: choices that have been around since before Pascal

You can teach the basics just as well with a normal language where you don't tell the kids about the other parts. They start with the basic expressions and you eventually give them the rest. Or, for people who want to jump into more complicated programs, you provide a library which abstracts out such things until they know enough to read that library and understand what you wrote.

I remember creating several of these libraries when my sister showed interest. It started with some basic input functions and expanded to handle other operations, in each case with a limited interface which worked. Instead of writing a new compiler from scratch, I wrote maybe 500 lines over a month or two by adding new functions when asked. And as a bonus, once she knew enough not to need that library, she could start understanding the language reference docs and building more complex stuff. No learning of new syntax when new functionality was desired.

Re: Need to strip out GPL contributions

They may have requested that all contributors assign copyright and ownership to them. That's not unusual--even the FSF do that. The problem of course is that they can then relicense it at any time to whatever they wish (they can't take the old code away from you, but they can benefit from the work of others and make proprietary-only software). Some projects eschew those agreements for that reason, which is the primary reason Linux has remained GPL2 only (also because Linus prefers it, but even without him it would be nearly impossible to get everybody's agreement to change it).

Re: A programming language as a product?

I expect it's not the language that's the moneymaker, but instead the educational resources around it. They've said that a large number of schools are using this for education. Whether or not that's a good idea, that's a lot of schools who now have to purchase licenses, especially if their next version develops backward-compatibility issues. Whether the schools will do that or switch to something similar remains to be seen.

GitHub merges 'useless garbage' says Linus Torvalds as new NTFS support added to Linux kernel 5.15

"I've been using Linux for over well 10 years now and I can't recall the last time I had to look into a NTFS format drive."

So because you don't need it, nobody else does either? If I unleashed that theory on the Linux kernel, I'd sheer off a ton of things I've never used. Compatibility with a number of processor types which I haven't used and don't plan to? Drivers for hardware that I don't have and isn't modern enough that I'm likely to get one. Lots of stuff in there I don't need, but that's a terrible argument for leaving it out.

As for uses, I have repeatedly mounted NTFS disks on Linux recently. Sometimes, it's just reading (Windows laptop died, quick can I get the hard drive out and recover some documents). There are two situations which occur with regularity where writing is important. First, when repairing a Windows drive in some way, including disinfecting something that was strong enough to make it hard to delete in Windows. Guess what. In order to mount the disk read-write, Windows has to shut down cleanly and clear the journal, which Windows never does by default anymore. I have to boot the drive to Windows hoping the malware I'm trying to remove won't take any new steps on startup just to restart it. I would value a NTFS driver that didn't make me do that.

Second, NTFS is sometimes used as the default filesystem for large external storage devices. The users plug it into their Windows machines and it shows up fine so they don't change it to something else. So to share a hard drive that I don't have permission to reformat, NTFS support is useful. If the NTFS driver has vulnerabilities, by all means hold it back until they're patched. But don't exclude it just because you don't use NTFS.

Re: "I've never actually required that"

Because anybody can create a GPG key, and a lot of changes are made by people who don't have a company behind them. A GPG key linked in some verifiable way to Paragon could be trackable, but a GPG key linked to an individual could lead to a real one as well as to a fake one. And they could also be stolen, so even if you know that someone is definitely legitimate rather than has submitted legitimate code thus far because they'll be inserting the dodgy stuff later, you don't know for a certainty that it's them submitting that code.

If you know everybody involved, having a system where you verify who the contributor is as your primary trust system can work. If you let everyone on the planet submit code, then that approach has reduced utility. It doesn't make it useless, but don't rely on it to save you from any particular situation.

Only 'natural persons' can be recognized as patent inventors, not AI systems, US judge rules

Re: Judge is right

Yes. I meant that the inventor on a patent must know how the invention works. If the training of the neural net is the thing which made the invention, then they need to understand at least that much. They don't need to understand existing tools they used, but anything which is new and contributes to the invention has to be understood in order to get the credit. So executing a program not written by you which then creates something doesn't count as invention even if whatever it created is patentible.

Re: Judge is right

No, unless they understand what the tool is doing. The inventor of a concept is the person or set of people who understand what they've created and came up with the idea. A neural network certainly doesn't yet. If a sapient program is created, it could, but a statistical analysis program isn't. Neither can a data entry person unacquainted with the purposes be said to invent something, because the concept already existed when the person who came up with the software wrote that.

That also only works if whatever the software creates is really patentible. A lot of the time, a model created by a neural network isn't any more inventive than any other. Depending on the thing it was trained to do, it might be, which makes the neural network even less responsible for the outcome.

Apple stalls CSAM auto-scan on devices after 'feedback' from everyone on Earth

Re: Hey Apple!

"So let's compare apples to apples (no pun intended). Google Photos' cloud storage scans uploaded photos for CSAM. Is that invasive of privacy?"

It's something you know when starting to use the service, so a lot less. More reasons later.

"Apple's plan is to scan photos that are headed for iCloud Photo Library, the iOS equivalent of Google Photos' cloud storage, but to do it in such a way that they don't have the results of hashes unless it matches known CSAM."

They are going to have the images. So they can recalculate the hashes any time they like. Your phrasing is incredibly misleading because it sounds as if they're keeping data off their servers when they're doing nothing of the kind.

"Is that invasive of privacy? More or less so than Google Photos' scanning?"

Yes and more. It is more invasive because it scans on a device which you own, not the server that they own. It gives them a probe into the device they don't own which can analyze information to which they have no right, so it's really easy to overstep the boundaries they currently claim to adhere to. Google photos only scans what comes to them, and they tell you they're going to do so. Definitely more invasive.

They lied. That's not the correct answer and they know it. You've specified why we know it's a lie already--they've repeatedly agreed to use their tech for repressive countries before, so we know they will do it again.

Which is why the on-device scanning is a problem. If Russia came to them and told them to write an on-device scanner, they'd grumble for a bit, maybe question it, then do it. But it would at least be public. Now, anybody can just slightly adjust the code they've already written. It's much easier to abuse and their use of it at all proves that their likelihood to grumble is quickly eroding.

Re: Hey Apple!

"If you have iCloud Photo Library (iCPL) turned on, photos get uploaded. If Apple did server-side scanning, you wouldn't have any more choice than you would have with on-device scanning, because iCPL uploads all photos, and always has."

Would it surprise you to here that, on my iPhone, ICPL is already turned off? Because it is. For other reasons, but I didn't want that on. As for other things scanning, I make decisions on whether to install apps based on the scanning they're going to do. WhatsApp is not to be found on my devices.

The difference is that, if they're scanning my content on their servers, then they need to take lots of steps to start scanning data I never put on their servers. If they're scanning on my device, it's a two-line change in their code to scan all of the photo library and a few more lines to start scanning everything else. The traffic would already be expected, the software couldn't be disabled, and therefore the risks are much higher. And as I said at the beginning, an encrypted backup where they can't scan either is still my ideal solution.

"So if the government mandates it, you could choose to not buy any more equipment, but if Apple does this, you still are required to buy an iPhone? Your control is not buying the product. You said it yourself, but then go on to claim that somehow because it's Apple you can't do anything about it."

Yeah, that was poorly phrased. I'll try again. If the government mandates it, then there is information which can permit it to be avoided. It is not forced on my equipment until the software update which includes it, which I can refuse. Whether a device does it or not can be determined when purchasing a device, and therefore it can be avoided. If Apple does it without any mandates, then it's sneaked into devices (like they've already done) and control is much less.

Another point is relevant in this part of the discussion, which is that no government has mandated this yet. I would prefer to deal with a government-mandated version than an Apple without-legitimacy version, but at the moment, we could deal with neither because the government hasn't passed any such law. You're making me choose between a -95% option and a -85% option when a 0% option is also available.

"And do you honestly think if it was a government-mandated thing it wouldn't be completely classified as to how it works and what it does,"

No, I don't. The law which inserts it has to be public. The system used doesn't have to be, but to mandate the installation of code requires a law which can be investigated and challenged. Some countries might try to push through something without telling anyone, except, oh right, they haven't.

Re: Hey Apple!

"So you'd rather they go along with what every other cloud company already does and scan it on the server side without explicitly making users aware that's what's happening?"

Over on-device, yes. Because then I can decide not to upload things and they don't run their scanner. Although an end-to-end encrypted backup would be even nicer.

"Further, I understand that there was never anything stopping any government from handing Apple on-device scanning code and forcing them to adopt it for sales to continue in that area—or even just passing a law requiring that device makers do it themselves. The idea that literally the only thing preventing this has been Apple not developing on-device scanning is absolutely absurd."

No, it's not. There is either code running on the device or not. If it's not, and the government mandates it, we can do what we want to about this. We could try to block the law. Or change the law. Or find a legal reason such a law is not permitted, which works better in countries with constitutional privacy systems but could also be enforced under human rights treaties. Or not buy any new equipment. If it's Apple doing it without any law, we have no control over it at all and moreover, no knowledge of how they're using it.

Re: It's true.

Or on the door of their local office, with the locks changed. There are very few organizations that stand in the way of autocratic orders and set up their systems to facilitate doing so. Apple isn't one of them. Their record is better than some others, but far from perfect.

Confessions of a ransomware negotiator: Well, somebody's got to talk to the criminals holding data hostage

Re: Disgusting

Not sure which point the "yes it is" is responding to. The second sentence is an unsurprising repetition of the previous point, which is still, you know just technically, wildly illegal.

Re: Disgusting

Sure, because contract assassination is a perfectly sane and just response. By the way, speaking more amorally, it's also quite difficult to identify the people you are suggesting get killed. And for your information, not every crime is terrorism.

Re: A must listen to is the BBC File on 4 Podcast - Held to Ransom

How would we know? Anyway, here's my guess: you posted it later in the discussion, so fewer people read it, so fewer people clicked the vote buttons. Or maybe the phrasing of this comment was more interesting than yours. I don't remember hearing about this before, so I didn't read your comment. There are a few factors that could contribute.

Norwegian student tracks Bluetooth headset wearers by wardriving around Oslo on a bicycle

Re: Does not make sense

It seems long, but he traveled long distances for twelve days, so if you saw the headsets twice each day and mark each siting as an hour, that could get you there. Divide the time period for other options. Given the range and speed of the bicycle, it's unlikely they got pings for 24 hours unless this student's friends were pranking him, so I'm guessing some grouping of time observations is involved.

Oh, and there are lots of Bluetooth headsets with more than six hours battery life. I have one which runs for eight consistently, and it was incredibly cheap. I also have ones that can run for forty hours without a recharge, though it's a larger over-ear type so not great to use outdoors.

Crypto-coin startup said its bot could generate huge profits from your Bitcoin. It was a scam, says SEC

Re: "All investors had to do was hand over their Bitcoin..."

It works because they went to some rich investors and spun them a tale where their company is the only one that can provide some service. They get that power by offering very low prices until everybody else goes out of business and ruthlessly buying anyone who looks to be competing still. The theory is that they'd eventually get their monopoly, send the prices through the roof, and cash in. Investors listen to this, think about real monopolies, immediately stop thinking, and turn on the money line.

What those investors don't usually think about is how the monopolies that exist manage to keep that power, especially keeping in mind the barriers to entry which often don't apply to these companies' ideas. The leaders of the companies don't mind; they get a company to play with, a bunch of money to waste, a healthy salary, and a nice exit package when things finally go wrong. Some may run this as a scam, others are clueless, and still others actually have an idea that could work and try for it.

Lenovo pops up tips on its tablets. And by tips, Lenovo means: Unacceptable ads

Technical attack, technical defense

I wonder what the network traffic looks like for getting this "tip" information onto each victim, and particularly what happens when the part that needs to download the largest assets crashes most of the way through. I wonder how they would react to a bot pretending to be an unstable app which continually tries and fails to download their ad, especially if multiple devices started to have trouble with the downloads all day long.

Preinstalled adware is entirely unacceptable on any hardware unless it is stated prominently at the time of purchase, and I wouldn't mind if that were banned too.

US Air Force chief software officer quits after launching Hellfire missile of a LinkedIn post at his former bosses

I'm not sure about that. Sour grapes to me would be if he was fired and sent this, but he was unhappy enough to quit of his own accord. That implies that, whatever the reasons, it's not something done to fire back at the person who took his job.

As for a good boss or an informed one, a bad informed boss is certainly a problem, but in many ways an uninformed good boss is too. A good boss who doesn't know how things work might, in good faith, make promises about things that can't get done. They might pass every decision down to someone who knows what they're doing and harm organization. While a somewhat informed good boss will definitely beat a bad one, good management requires some basic level of knowledge of what the people below you are doing. Someone who lacks that knowledge is likely to be ineffective or problematic without needing managerial incompetence as well.

A speech recognition app goes into a bar. Speak up if you’ve heard it already

Re: Sharp

I have come to the conclusion that some cheap low-power electronics are magical. Sure, they will refuse to run if there aren't some batteries in the slot, but the device doesn't actually use them once you put them in because they will run for years. I want to meet the people who designed such things and ask how they managed to get so much efficiency in their electricity use, presumably requiring quite a bit of engineering time, while also building the thing out of really flimsy plastic. Unfortunately, once I've realized that it's functioned correctly for eight years on a pair of AAA batteries, they're nowhere to be found.

Banned: The 1,170 words you can't use with GitHub Copilot

Any interest, though

Does anyone want this? I admit I don't like auto-completion basically at all (it annoys me when the editor tries to close my parentheses). I understand, though, why suggesting function names and showing parameters could be useful. Trying to predict the end to your statements, though, seems to me to be likely useless and definitely annoying. It's not as if you don't know how you're ending a line you've already started writing, so if it guesses right, at best you save a little bit of typing. It's also likely to guess wrong at least sometimes.

If anyone reading this wants such a feature, I'd like to know why.

Re: Usage

You'll just have to type the names out yourself. It might not even have guessed at that point that you're going to be naming countries anyway, even if it does see the word country, because there are a lot of contexts in which country could appear where individual names don't. But if it happens to guess right, it still won't suggest it. I'm sure you'll be fine.

Facebook: Let us tell you WhatsApp – we don't want to pay that €225m GDPR fine

Re: Law enforcement

I didn't see that as a commentary on all Irish people, but instead on the DPC. As the protection authority with the most power for most large tech companies, it has taken relatively few actions, those actions have been small, and they take a rather long time to get started. Given that Ireland is the European home for these tech companies primarily for tax reasons, it has an incentive to keep them there and competition for that desire, both of which can be helped by lax regulation. Whether that is deliberate or the DPC is just ponderous about enforcement, the desire for it to go faster is widely held.

NSA: We 'don't know when or even if' a quantum computer will ever be able to break today's public-key encryption

Re: Misdirection Again (Why am I not surprised?)

".....so it DOES NOT HURT if the algorithm is hard to identify....does it?"

It does hurt if you made any mistakes because nobody else tested for whether you had a clue what you were doing. If you are infallible in designing encryption, which is unlikely, it provides a mild benefit the strength of which depends on the resources of the attacker. But we've had that discussion before, so I'll stop now.

Re: See if the NSA asks for funding for such a computer

Only if they did it wrong. If you have a quantum computer and you want to use crypto to earn money, there's more to gain by finding wallets that haven't spent money in a long time and cracking their private keys. That gives you money without making it obvious that a lot more mining is being done.

Children of China, your state-sanctioned hour of gaming begins … now!

Re: "The spokesperson named Chess, Go, and programming as games"

Yes, it involves the same actions as playing the game, but with a specific goal in mind. You're not playing for the challenge of it, but instead looking for things which don't go as you thought they would. It can be fun to do, but it's done for testing, not for pure entertainment. Programming is not a game, even if you're testing a game you wrote. After you're finished finding the bugs, if your own game is captivating enough for you to play, then it's a game.

You may be wrong there. The games being banned are multiplayer games, in which communication with others is important. You have to make plans with your team members, which involves writing quickly and in an understandable way and may involve other languages for an international game. I don't know how often that is as I don't play any, but you do use language when playing multiplayer games.

In my opinion, only point 1 has any relevance. The others, well, let's look at each one:

"2) People playing online to absurd extents do not possess the basic level of social skills that were accepted as a norm 20 years ago and appear increasingly incapable of communicating, relating to or functioning in society."

Right. I've heard this before. About a lot of different things. I've heard that complaint about the television generation, the console game generation, the internet generation, and people who do lots of other things which are less generational but also involve spending a ton of time doing one activity (for example, reading books a lot and yes, I have heard people say it). We seem to be mostly fine. There are some people who lack social skills, but it's a stretch to blame that on some piece of mostly unrelated technology.

"3) All other forms of media break taboos to shock the audience and are having to get more and more extreme to shock people. People are getting increasingly desensitised and people argue that there is a correlation or causation with people then doing these things themselves."

I don't care. I also don't think it's true. I haven't really seen media as a whole getting more shocking. Certain types were more tightly regulated and now can be more shocking, but there's plenty of media out there which would have been just as acceptable a few decades ago. In each case, you decide what you want to consume and you read or watch what's out there. And people have been trying to prove that violent movies/television/games promotes violent behavior for decades (two for games, more for the others) and the research is still inconclusive. Continue to believe it if you like, but to justify regulation, you're going to need better evidence than that.

Re: Freedom vs public health

"We also need to be wary of those people who espouse freedom -- loudly -- while all the time pushing for laws that restrict others' freedoms."

I entirely agree with that sentiment, however it is of absolutely no relevance here. Those talking about freedom in this topic are calling for this to remain a private decision.

Regulating games based on their content, E.G. those which are gambling, is one thing that more will agree with, but you've still got it backwards. The first step would be to restrict the amount of gambling available based on society's preferences, not to restrict the time spent but allowing any level. The Chinese law doesn't do anything regarding gambling in games, and restricts all games equally.

Your arguments, while more likely to get support, do not apply to the situation under discussion.

And how about any of the other things children do for entertainment? How about reading books for fun (popular ones, not the classics or textbooks)? How about building things with toys? How about making up arbitrary games with their friends and playing those? In each case, the activity could cause problems if done too much, and at first glance the activity doesn't benefit the child much. Also in each case, the child actually does get benefits and it is a perfectly normal way for them to spend their spare time.

Forcing children to do nothing but work or learn is likely to burn them out. Restrictions should be imposed based on the child's activities and success rate, and if they happen to want to play a game on Wednesday, it's not automatically unhealthy.

I don't play games much (the odd puzzle or word game, perhaps ten minutes per week on average), and the closest thing to social media I do is posting here. So as someone who already doesn't want to do those things, what reason should democratic countries have for banning them? Usually, things are banned because they have a negative consequence on others, but looking stupid online where we can all ignore them doesn't reach that level for me. If you don't want your children playing games, feel free to place restrictions on them, but I can't think of a reason to impose your will on everyone else.

Logitech Bolt devices support secure Bluetooth Low Energy – but forget the 'Unifying Receiver'

Re: All I can listen

It's also encrypted, so no. The hopping is a minor advantage to throw off a basic listener, but the encryption is the important bit.

Rumors of satellite-comms-capable iPhone abound. The truth could be rather boring

Re: Starlink Debunked

"Literally no one can compete with them on base cost to deploy."

It depends who you count as their competitors. Geosynchronous satellite is the primary competitor for coverage where ground cable isn't available, and they absolutely can compete on price, not by having cheaper launches, but by having not very many of them. Launches for 42000 LEO satellites is more expensive than launches for 10 geosynchronous ones.

Re: Starlink Debunked

Ok, I decided to see what this was about. While the presenter is clearly biased against Starlink, the points raised aren't wrong. Here's a summary for those who don't want to watch:

1. It will be expensive to send up so many satellites and sell the equipment at a loss, so the predictions for revenue are very optimistic. This isn't really a surprise for a Musk company.

2. Starlink is worse than fiber service. Duh.

3. Starlink has worse bandwidth and better latency than geosynchronous satellite. Duh.

4. It clutters up the orbit. If you didn't know this already, you weren't paying attention. This leads to problems for land-based astronomy, future launches, and other users.

5. Failed satellites haven't automatically fallen like they were supposed to.

These points put together don't "debunk" Starlink; that was a poorly chosen name. They raise valid objections to it, most of which are well-known already. When you consider them in the context of the article, the only change is to slightly weaken the first objection--if they manage to get phone service over their satellites, that adds another set of possible subscribers which could make more money and make their revenue targets more reasonable (although it's still Musk, so don't expect it to be perfect now).

No, that wouldn't work. The authoritarian governments would require that satellite comms companies disclose customer information to them in compliance with local laws. If the company refuses to do that, the government bans payments to them. Only those few with bank accounts outside the country or who manage to exchange cash for service through someone who does can use the service. Because so few can use the service, the phones aren't widely sold in the country.

If the government wants to go further, they require that any phone with the feature is locked down to the satellite providers which comply or ban them outright. Buying or possessing one which doesn't comply with that regulation becomes a crime. Detecting those who have them can be done with a cheap radio surveillance device. Satellite may work everywhere, but it doesn't prevent dictators from dictating.

Adding AI to everything won't make sense until we can use it for anything

Re: We have AI

If innovation is your wish, it's been done before. Robots instructed to perform actions and doing them in unexpected ways because it decided how to do it without instruction. For example using an object that isn't a hammer to pound in a nail, even though a hammer was present. Was this intelligent because it improvised, dumb because it should have used a hammer, or inconclusive because it didn't know what a hammer was and chose a policy which, while not optimal, got the goal accomplished?

The question for the "AI is impossible/we have never seen it" people remains: what does a computer need to do to convince you it is intelligent in some way, keeping in mind that you can be intelligent in one thing without knowing everything else there is to know.

Happy birthday, Linux: From a bedroom project to billions of devices in 30 years

Re: I've got a suggestion...

Given the discussion at hand, neither of our opinions are moot though both are unimportant. You claim your organization "logical", I don't think so. It's not a thing that can be proven either way, so it's just arguing over what we like.

Re: I've got a suggestion...

I'll admit the organization you decided to use does sound like a nightmare to me. If you really have files that only differ by capitalization, then you're relying on everybody understanding what the capitalization means. I, at least, would not. If presented with a folder containing update_database.sh and Update_database.sh, which weren't identical, I would have no clue what the difference was and would be very cautious about which one I used. When you could be much clearer about this (update_database_local_user.sh and update_database_all_users.sh or, better yet, one script which takes a parameter to select which set of users you're running on), the capitalization doesn't sound like the best method.

Apple settles antitrust case with developers, but it's far from an Epic resolution to App Store monopoly concerns

Re: I get why change is necessary

It's a little different, namely that you can choose which stores to sell to based on those prices, sell directly using your own online or retail, or do both simultaneously. And of course because the stores frequently provide benefits and take on some risks, depending on the item and the relationship. Apple doesn't do either of those.

South Korea may ban Apple, Google from forcing store payment systems on app devs

"Will alternative stores have to pay for iOS and Android development, support etc. as well?"

No.

"Will they contribute to the cost of supplying free apps?"

No.

Just like the existing ones. Apple develops IOS, and it doesn't get the right to tax any user of that operating system. It decides how much to sell the hardware for. It decides when to cut people off of software updates. It could, if it wanted, charge for software updates like it did ten years ago. Just because they spend money on something doesn't mean that I am obliged to pay for it.

What's the top programming language? It's not JavaScript but Python, says IEEE survey

All of the above. And for each item in your list, it does it sort of fine and has a good reason to be designed like that.

It's not like some scripting languages I could name which, if used to implement any complex logic become unreadable above a hundred lines. It's not like some programming languages which require the creation of tons of unnecessary constructs when the programmer really wants to automate some simple set of actions. And it can easily wrap C libraries, abstracting out those peculiarities of C which make writing everything in it difficult (string parsing, anyone) while keeping its speed advantages for the intensive bits.

There is a lot to complain about when criticizing Python, but you have in fact named one of its strengths.

Singapore is the only nation with a dedicated 'net link to China. And they've just agreed to expand its use

Yes. Although they also have a satellite connection for some people. Most people with computers use the internal intranet and don't have any access, which saves on the number of guards you have to put there.

Robots don't smoke, says Alibaba, and that's why they deliver parcels so fast

Re: Awaiting the day

Unless you're doing both kinds of delivery and you get to select which, you've just moved the complaint to those who live at the bottom who would not like to walk up that many stairs to collect their package from the roof.

There are other problems, too. How about places where the roof has snow on it in the winter? How does a drone deal with that? Do the residents have to climb up and remove the snow frequently? How does a multi-occupant building work? Do the packages all go to the same place and people just work out who gets what? If the building does make separate receptacles for each resident, how does the drone identify which one to use? How would the system be paid for and standardized? How would it be added to older buildings?

Re: Doesn't seem safe yet

<pedant>That works out to one accident in a million deliveries, or one every fifty days</pedant> if you accept that rate, which I don't. There's no way they got enough information to estimate that number to that precision, and likely they have little evidence to estimate it at all. I'm sure it hasn't made a million deliveries yet, so the only way they're not lying is if it has so far had zero accidents. If it is, they don't know how likely it is to have accidents. They also state this number as if it has meaning without characterizing any of the necessary details, such as the environment necessary to get that level. I guarantee that it will have a lot more accidents in the winter in northern China than in the summer, in the sandy areas of western China than in paved ones not near sources of abrasives, and in lightly trafficked areas than in dense cities with plenty of available collisions. Yet they don't mention anything of the kind at all.

Re: Sooo

I'd like to see them try it on mine. That place was a robot's nightmare. Steps everywhere, never even, pathways intermittently blocked with vehicles, very steep pathways, snow and ice at some points, and ground made of whatever the builders had access to at the time including uneven bricks. They also hadn't completed their wheel chair accessibility requirements either, which would make things even harder. If they want to use these in real deliveries, they're going to need to deal with a lot of that stuff. I have a feeling it's a lot like Amazon's drones, which got tested with some hype and a lot of protests but never really got used.

Poly Network says it's got pretty much all of that $610m in stolen crypto-coins back

Yes, that's all true, but they still tend to pursue criminals who kept things over criminals who, in the long term, got nothing. Doing otherwise runs the risk of hung for a penny, hung for a pound, as well as costing extra in police time. I'm happy if they still pursue him, but there are reasons to doubt whether they will.

Re: Frozen by Tether

"Trivial to remotely freeze."

That describes Tether, but does not describe most other cryptocurrencies. You should investigate how Tether works--it's very different from most other ones and there's a lot to complain about in it. Some of your points are intrinsic to most existing cryptocurrencies, whereas others are remediated by design decisions. As I'm not really an adherent, my defense will stop there.

China puts continuous consent at the center of data protection law

Re: The Why, The What

The why is to have additional measures for penalizing tech companies who don't do what China wants. Usually, that's actually anti-privacy measures such as having pseudonymous or anonymous interactions, encrypting anything, not having records to provide to the police, etc. The letter of the law is very nice though. Like GDPR but with a few extra features which aren't bad. If only they did this because they believed in that.

Having trouble getting your mitts on that Raspberry Pi? You aren't alone

"I still can't see why people can't just spin up a virtual machine for that."

A few reasons. First, there's the complexity. For someone who doesn't know much about computing already, getting a VM to work correctly with everything else can be confusing. If you're running a server on a VM, then you need to know where the VM's network connection is and how it's currently connected to the computer's one, then bridge them properly so packets can reach the VM through the computer, then correctly configure both the host's firewall and the VM's. That's confusing for someone unfamiliar with network administration.

Second, I mentioned the uptime as a benefit of the Pi. If a child has access to a Pi and a laptop, and they have a project which involves having a server, daemon, or anything similar operating at all times, the Pi makes that easy and the laptop does not. Adding a VM to the laptop makes that worse, as now the child has to have a window open and a healthy chunk of memory occupied at all times in addition to preventing the laptop from going into sleep mode.

Third, the Pi allows for projects which a VM does not. If the child becomes interested in working with hardware, it can be interfaced directly to the Pi. If the child wants to deploy the Pi as networking equipment, whether as an AP, a DNS filter, or a VPN endpoint, they can do that. If they need a second machine capable of acting as a desktop, they can do that. If they want to make it a media center device, they can do that. Its versatility is one of its strongest features, both for students and for those of us who like using it for our own projects.