subreddit
stringclasses 11
values | text
stringlengths 246
28.5k
|
|---|---|
technology
|
Basic macroeconomics includes the principle that trade benefits both parties. That should be obvious, since it is a voluntary transaction, and we presume that entities act in their own self-interest.
There's also the basic principle that prices are a signal of resource allocation, and that monkeying with pricing distorts those signals. Typically, when somebody has a fever, their body temperature isn't the problem, and cooling them down to reduce the fever isn't the cure - in fact, it tends to exacerbate their condition. Instead, we identify what's wrong and address the cause.
Tariffs distort the signaling value of pricing. They are a misguided, counterproductive mechanism for addressing the underlying problem. Yes, America has a problem with participating in the solar economy - and there are many other, better solutions to address it than slapping tariffs on imports.
|
technology
|
I agreed, 100%, with the part of your earlier post about comparative advantage. But your comment seemed to slide off-track, suggesting that *because* the comparative advantage existed and all we contribute is the R&D, this isn’t a profitable endeavor for us and we shouldn’t prioritize it - or, at least, that we’re at an unresolvable disadvantage here, and tariffs are a reasonable response. (I may be misinterpreting, because there are some loose ends in your comment where I had to infer your meaning.)
I disagree with that, because I regard basic research, design, and development as *the most important* parts of this process - the top of the food chain, if you will. We should encourage this disparity, and leverage it to our benefit... in part because of comparative advantage.
|
technology
|
Hillary who? What base? No one is arguing that fossil fuels are not going the way of the fossil. However currently there are many productive sources and those sources will be sold until they cant be, or are depleted. Expecting that anything else would be done is self delusion. Its a sweet thought, but lets be realistic. You cant “re-assign” people. This is not Communist China. People in the United States have the right to pursue whatever they wish, whether or not you or anyone else agrees. Having the freedom to make intelligent choices means allowing others the freedom to make poor ones. Im all for offering a horse a drink, but i’ll be damned if I make him do it.
|
technology
|
The big issue is that China doesn't give a crap about intellectual property. If company A in the US spends millions to research and develop solar panels or any other tech, and then contracts it out to a Chinese factory, how long do you think it will be until other Chinese factories not contracted will be producing the same thing? Chinese industry is largely state controlled and if they can get an advantage by ripping us off, they will. China is playing the long game here, they want to be the supreme world power. You need to play more CivRev.
|
technology
|
Yeah tell that to the early 1900s Japanese. They ripped stuff off, and in some cases improved on things. And then they tried to take over half the world. "One of the costs of outsourcing" my ass. It shouldn't be implicit and it shouldn't be accepted. Hell, the Chinese are constantly trying to rip stuff off that's not being outsourced. Their industrial/technological espionage is probably one of their most important programs. Being ok with that is not in America's best interest
|
technology
|
Don’t moralize over whose time period/empire was justified and righteous. They didn’t win the day in the end. Neither did the Soviet Union and their reverse engineering efforts. Prior to the invention of the modern patent office how was progress ever made? Oh man the dark ages of ship, sail and high finance on the seven seas! This business is being done because American companies are tacitly ok with it as they can reap the short term gains. The distant future is scary and full of spiders. The now and near are comforting and almost knowable.
|
technology
|
And I like how you argue without making a single valid point there. You know the ship and sail, along with all of the navigation techniques employed to use them were huge advances in human history right? And we beat Japan with a technology that had they been able to copy before we used it, would've been disastrous for us? Funny you mention the USSR, they survived for so long explicitly because they stole nuclear weapons technology from the US. Ignorance abounds....
|
technology
|
In fact, in hard drives it is a bit of a misnomer. The motherboard chipset was the master on the ATA line, and both drives were slaves. At least according to the interface bus terminology, which seems the most relevant here. A master is a central node which initiates communication with potentially many slaves. Master/Slave is pretty much the opposite of Client/Server, where the many nodes initiate communication with the central node.
|
technology
|
Bayaaaa racism....
That's an incredibly reductive in one-dimensional view on the matter.
The fact is that the more enthusiatic people on the left are so vitriolic that you don't even have to say that you support Trump or even vote Republican. The mere fact that you would question Hillary or the Democratic party would be enough to make you an enemy of the world, racist, sexist, child-killer who offends with every word.
It's asinine, and this comment crystallizes it. That is exactly why the left was totally surprised when Trump won the election.
Nobody wants to engage with zealots like that. It's getting old. Get a new message, or you going to put us in a position where we get someone like Trump in power again.
|
technology
|
"Trolling" is what the "ladies" of that sub call anyone who demonstrates what professional victims/hypocrites/idiots they are.
They're so afraid of any conflicting opinions/thoughts/ideas, they auto ban people who go to subs they don't approve of.
That's how incredibly pathetic and afraid they are.
I can call a slice of pizza, a thermonuclear weapon, but that doesn't mean it's true.
It's the same thing when you girls call people sexist.
You use that word to dismiss everyone who disagrees with you, whether they're right or not is completely irrelevant.
That sub is a perfect example of what happens to women (or anyone really) when they sit in an echo chamber whose entire purpose is to confirm their own biases while purposely censoring anything contradicts it.
It pumps out nothing but professional victims that reek of hypocrisy and bigotry.
|
technology
|
Who said I gave up my friends I went to war with, moved out of The South, quit talking to my family, or stopped going to family reunions?
None of these things are true. Hell, one of my current team members is a retired cav scout.
What is true, is that I don't talk to racist sexist pieces of shit like you. There are plenty of good conservatives out there. You're not one.
|
technology
|
Do you have some kind of disability? Where the fuck did I say I was a cav scout?
>Your entire comment history is one whiny piss ant comment calling people racist and misogynistic after the other.
You read the wrong comment history. >95% of my comment history is programming or technology related.
>nothing I’ve said is ... sexist
Bullshit. You want on pro-life rant putting down all women in a thread where women were supporting each other.
>racist
Since you were proving the person you were originally replying to right with the "racist sexist" comment, I figured both were true.
>You live in a echo chamber because you proclaim everything you don’t agree with is sexist racist or whatever else you piss and moan about.
I've literally never done this in my life. Calling out very obvious sexists who trolls women's subs is not the same as randomly calling anyone I disagree with racist or sexist.
>you sound whiney ass pog to me
I had to pull this from your post history and that you'll probably never figure out that it got caught in autofilter.... So first I was a cav scout, now I was a pog? God damn, you just can't get anything right, can you? I was 11B.
|
technology
|
Someone comes up with a network that actually addresses this issue instead of relying upon government-protected oligopolies that don’t give a shit because you’re a captive customer. Then they become rich as people flock to it. Then they also become shit. Then a new company comes along. Ad infinitum. Companies are shitty because they buy protections for their oligopolies in the form of expensive taxes, regulation, and licensing all sold to the masses as ways to ‘protect the consumer’ or some bullshit but actually just protect the status quo. Like how GM should have collapsed in ‘08 but the government stepped in and saved them because the US is about as capitalist as China is communist.
|
technology
|
Yeah, that's why people justifying censorship are short-sighted. They assume they would always be in charge of the censorship machine. It sucks finding yourself on the wrong end of the weapon you've created.
Establishment parties across Europe are shitting their pants from the rise of populist movements, yet they create legal tools of censorship that will fall in the hands of the same populists in case they do get in power. Surely, they can't be *this* stupid.
|
technology
|
Censorship is not always problematic. What is problematic is ill-defined censorship.
For instance - censoring blatant calls to kill, murder or maim fellow members of society is pretty reasonable. But we can also highlight or devalue the post through means of reducing it's visibility, or pointing to it's call to illegal or immoral action and by this extent we can make an appeal to authority or an appeal to morality to detract people from seeing it rather then outright removal.
Another aspect to the problem with "remove extreme content" is the fact that as what is considered extreme grows and what is considered the norm narrows, more content will be labeled as extreme and censored by broad rules. However, if we have a list of very specific rules then what is considered extreme is well defined and one can easily categorize a statement and even have the option for flagging it for review by the author or be flagged by the company and given some editing suggestions to the author - in this way, what is being done is focusing on clarifying intent, and ensuring that the discussion is had in a civil manner while deterring the call to illegal activity (ex. murdering a person do to protected class or membership in an organization).
In a very real way, the problem is not the censorship itself. But the broad, ill-defined censorship that is typically implemented.
|
technology
|
Honestly, I used to think that removing the headphone jack was dumb as hell, but I never looked back once I switched to Bluetooth headphones. Wires get in the way far too often IMO. Especially at places like the gym where they can get caught on something and get painfully ripped out of your ear.
Still no reason to completely remove the jack, though. Not everyone can dish out the extra money for decent Bluetooth headphones on the spot.
|
technology
|
ARM SoC CPUs use what is known as Reduced Instruction Set Computing (RISC). RISC instruction sets are smaller, require less energy to process, and complete quickly, freeing up system resources or allowing the device to “idle” to save battery.
Intel x86 CPUs use what is known as Complex Instruction Set Computing (CISC). CISC instruction sets are vastly more complex, adding together strings containing multiple instructions.
One is designed for mobility and energy conservation, the other is designed to do complex instructions. You can run iOS and Android on an x86 chip and they will run fine. They other way around not so much.
|
technology
|
I have three points.
1. While RISC does less complex instructions, it does them faster. So, there's no clear win, just a choice. RISC is faster for simple operations but you need to build complex operations out of simple ones. CISC is slower but complex instructions are encapsulated in one instruction.
2. While ARMv8 is "reduced" is it not a small instruction set. It has 14 multiplication instructions for various situations and integer types, as well as some involving additional arithmetic (For example, UMADDL will multiply two unsigned 32 bit integers and add a 64 bit one). It also includes both bitwise shifting and rotation, arithmetic shifting and bitfield instructions to extend smaller numbers to register size in various ways. It also has a wide selection of memory access instructions, including support for prefetching, storing and retrieving variable length floating point numbers, storing and loading pairs of data and exclusive locks for synchronisation purposes. Finally, A64 includes support for cryptography (supporting AES, SHA-1 and SHA-256), exception handling, debugging, hints (that is, letting the CPU know what is probably going to be happening soon, such as prefetching), floating point instructions, vector operations and type conversion (specifically, between floating point numbers and integers).
3. If CISC is truly faster... Then why are fan-less iPhone chips backed by a tiny battery benchmarking faster than some of Intel's laptop chips?
|
technology
|
> You are comparing apples to oranges. There is no true comparison.
That's a cop out. They're both chips with registers, cores, cache and so on. One of the main differences is the instruction set but you say that should make the Intel chips faster. So, what other factors are countering that and dragging down Intel chips in benchmarks?
Comparing a push bike to a car is apples and oranges but I can still explain why the car is faster.
>Now answer this. If ARM processors were truly faster than x86 or x64 than why cant you run full fledged adobe products on them?
Two answers: Adobe's software is old and very powerful. To get that level of power back when it was first created required low level code tied to the specific instruction set they were targeting. In short, they wrote it specifically for Intel and converting it is a massive amount of work. Nonetheless, [they are](https://www.theverge.com/2018/7/13/17567886/ipad-photoshop-release-date-apple-photo-editing-adobe).
Second, I *do* use such software professionally on my iPad. Not Adobe, for the reasons above, but the Affinity apps which I find better, smoother, faster and easier to use. I haven't touched Photoshop for months (except to load old documents and do something quick) and do not intend to ever go back, iPad version or not.
|
technology
|
I'm not sure what Amazon stands to gain, there have been many reports both from workers and from the media who have looked into allegations regarding the terrible working conditions at Amazon. This isn't an allegation anymore, its just fact and has been for the past few years.
Especially with the winter rush coming up, it would be nice and proper of Amazon to admit to their problems and explain changes, they have more then enough money to make changes. Hire more people to share work!! Automate some things to help workers. Give some extra breaks. Pay them better.
Amazon just can't win this one without actually doing something. They have NO reason not to do something. Unlike other companies that are making minimal profit, Amazon has the resources.
|
technology
|
Yeah I'm learning electronics so buying raw components and a lot of stuff is 1/10th the price, so I get 10 and if one is a dud (rare from 5 star vendors) I'm still way ahead, and I blew up 3 chips myself the other day trying to solder cause I'm a newb...
I had one vendor would only sell 1 motor per order because he was sending them as a "gift" to get around tariffs/import fees.
|
technology
|
I might dabble a little bit in 'green' trading. Lots of cannabis companies are going public and though some are only worth maybe a tenth of a cent per share, if it becomes federally legal, the stocks are going to explode and being at ground zero when that day comes might set you up for major success. - Of course acquisitions and mergers will happen as the market consolidates, and that's only good for your cheap stocks.
|
technology
|
It's just an example and no you won't be going to prison for buying a 6k camera, putting a brick in the box, and sending it back.
Sure you could go to prison if you continuously do it, make thousands of alt-accounts, attempt to hide what you're doing, and then get caught by the FBI.
I'm not ripping $6k cameras from boxes but you could do it without any negative repercussions. Maybe a ban from Amazon, really depends on how much you spend, how many orders you make etc.
http://fortune.com/2018/06/05/amazon-tech-scam/
Maybe Jeff will go to prison for his shitty worker conditions? Bahah, just kidding.
|
technology
|
56,310 employees at Amazon, per google search.
Let's take the Net Worth and distribute it...
That's ~213k/year per each of the 56k+ employees.
Subtract that by one, assuming the number doesn't include head honcho. He can keep 213k/year -- maybe even more.
So could he pay his employees more? Absolutely, to the tune of 150k+ more per each employee!
Are they worth it?
FUCK no -- no pick/pack job I do not care what it is how hard the work it what you're moving, etc....no forklift operator, truck loader, is worth more than AT MOST 30$ an hour. Even that is outlandishly ridiculous.
Just because they CAN pay more, doesn't mean they SHOULD.
Would you pay someone 500k to mow your lawn, just because you're a billionaire?
And don't say yes because you can afford it -- that's charity, not pay.
Business is not charity. You get paid what you're worth -- if you think you're worth more, you find another job.
|
technology
|
Nowhere in my post did I advocate 'evening out' the salaries.
However, since you want to tow the capitalist psychopath line today, I'll bite. Internationally, Amazon has been accused of near sweatshop quality labor conditions. Absurd policies regarding productivity and bathroom use are not unusual in the UK or the US. I'm not saying the floor level employees need $500k, but they should, at the very least, meet minimal labor standards. They should, at the very least, be paid at such a level that the governing body in the country the business is operating very profitably within, does not have to step in to provide offsetting welfare benefits because the pay scale offered by one of the largest employers internationally has opted to pay sub-poverty levels and benefits to full-time employees. It is not charity to pay a living wage. It is responsible business ownership. Take your faux-socialism outrage elsewhere.
|
technology
|
Seems like if there were better employment opportunities, they would be taken instead, no?
So a shit job with shit pay is better than no job with no pay, right?
I would wager the economies of the sweatshop areas would be markedly worse without these deplorable business coming in and giving people terrible opportunities like awful jobs with more pay.
Not saying Amazon isn't necessarily deplorable because they could do better for workers but don't--but that's their prerogative. Dont support them, dont work for them, but leave their business to them.
If it was bad enough, they would have no employees
Nobody is forcing anyone to work there.
|
technology
|
Your premise falls flat when it comes to there being better opportunities everywhere. The city I live near probably has plenty of upward mobility opportunities, but if you're not near a city, you don't have the same flexibility.
For example, during the 4 years I lived in a rural area, WalMart replaced one location, and added 3 others, with full-sized stores. The county is home to under 150k people, and over the years following, non-WalMart business evaporated. WalMart became one of the few employers to work for, unless you had the capital to start up on your own. What you end up with is the largest employers paying the lowest wages, dodging taxes on the local, state, and federal level, and then expecting welfare programs to offset the poverty-level pay they're offering. If you work a full-time job, you should be above poverty levels.
If there WERE a better option, I'm sure many would choose it. But, that does not excuse full time employers from paying a wage that is above the poverty level.
|
technology
|
Why do you think liberals seek to raise it? Why do you think conservatives talk of abolishing it? It is absolutely the fault of the company's greed if they opt to tiptoe along the minimums required.
>Would you pay 15$ for something you could get for 2$?
>Absolutely not. That's just dumb economics.
If you're pretending the welfare and wage of your employee is in any way comparable to the cost of a good, you've already lost. You're paying your $2 wage, losing out in lost training time as you repeatedly have to re-train new resources for the position, while billing the government to offset what you should've paid in the first place.
|
technology
|
Mississippi was the first to do this, I think, so at least we aren't the only ones fighting this dumb battle. I'm a sysadmin for a school district and we are no longer allowed to use Google Apps for Education, so I was given about 3 months to move our entire online presence (including email) to Exchange Online. It was a shit show and no one really catches the irony of moving to another online juggernaut that's going to sell our data.
|
technology
|
You can get a mint condition year-old iPhone 8 for $450, and a mint two-year-old iPhone 7 for $300. Both processors compete with or blow away competing Qualcomm products. IOS famously does not need as much RAM as android does to run smoothly. You being a rooted user gives you access to updates, but 99% of the android population will receive 0-1 OS updates in the lifetime of their phone. 100% of the iOS population will receive 5. Crunch the numbers on what one year of OS support vs 5 years of OS support is worth.
You’re still locked into Google’s App Store and services.
|
technology
|
Apple handed ALL China user data to the government
https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2018/03/apple-privacy-betrayal-for-chinese-icloud-users/
Campaign targets Apple over privacy betrayal for Chinese iCloud ...
China tried to hack Gmail accounts and Google chose to leave walking away from billions.
Then we have
https://techcrunch.com/2017/07/29/apple-removes-vpn-apps-from-the-app-store-in-china/
Apple removes VPN apps from the App Store in China | TechCrunch
Versus Google
https://www.androidauthority.com/using-google-fi-in-china-850456/
Using Project Fi in China: Say goodbye to VPNs - Android Authority
Guess marketing works by Apple.
|
technology
|
What? Apple for a buck handed all their user data to the China government versus Google chose to leave.
https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2018/03/apple-privacy-betrayal-for-chinese-icloud-users/
Campaign targets Apple over privacy betrayal for Chinese iCloud ...
But even worse by Apple
https://techcrunch.com/2017/07/29/apple-removes-vpn-apps-from-the-app-store-in-china/
Apple removes VPN apps from the App Store in China | TechCrunch
Versus Google
https://www.androidauthority.com/using-google-fi-in-china-850456/
Using Project Fi in China: Say goodbye to VPNs - Android Authority
Let's work on actual facts instead of marketing.
|
technology
|
> New Chinese legislation enacted in 2017 requires cloud services to be operated by Chinese companies, meaning companies like Apple must either lease server space inside China or establish joint ventures with Chinese partners.
Chinese domestic law gives the government virtually unrestricted access to user data stored inside China without adequate protection for users’ rights to privacy, freedom of expression or other basic human rights.
As a result, Chinese internet users can face arrest and imprisonment for merely expressing, communicating or accessing information and ideas the authorities do not approve of.
Amnesty’s online campaign urges consumers to tell Tim Cook to reject double standards when it comes to privacy for Apple’s Chinese customers, whose personal data is now at risk of ending up in the hands of the government.
Sounds like a case of the Chinese government enacting insane laws and screwing its citizens over. Care to elaborate on Apple “ha[ving] their user[‘s] data”
|
technology
|
> New Chinese legislation enacted in 2017 requires cloud services to be operated by Chinese companies, meaning companies like Apple must either lease server space inside China or establish joint ventures with Chinese partners.
Chinese domestic law gives the government virtually unrestricted access to user data stored inside China without adequate protection for users’ rights to privacy, freedom of expression or other basic human rights.
As a result, Chinese internet users can face arrest and imprisonment for merely expressing, communicating or accessing information and ideas the authorities do not approve of.
Amnesty’s online campaign urges consumers to tell Tim Cook to reject double standards when it comes to privacy for Apple’s Chinese customers, whose personal data is now at risk of ending up in the hands of the government.
Sounds like a case of the Chinese government enacting insane laws and screwing its citizens over.
|
technology
|
> New Chinese legislation enacted in 2017 requires cloud services to be operated by Chinese companies, meaning companies like Apple must either lease server space inside China or establish joint ventures with Chinese partners.
Chinese domestic law gives the government virtually unrestricted access to user data stored inside China without adequate protection for users’ rights to privacy, freedom of expression or other basic human rights.
As a result, Chinese internet users can face arrest and imprisonment for merely expressing, communicating or accessing information and ideas the authorities do not approve of.
Amnesty’s online campaign urges consumers to tell Tim Cook to reject double standards when it comes to privacy for Apple’s Chinese customers, whose personal data is now at risk of ending up in the hands of the government.
Sounds like a case of the Chinese government enacting insane laws and screwing its citizens over.
|
technology
|
Yes and Google chose asking too much and left over making billions. But not Apple and instead gave up all their user data for a buck.
Removing the VPN software even worse as cutting off users at the knees. Versus Google provides a VPN that is so easy to use.
https://www.androidauthority.com/using-google-fi-in-china-850456/
Using Project Fi in China: Say goodbye to VPNs - Android Authority
Apple gave up way more private data than Cambridge analytics got from FB. More users and far more private.
|
technology
|
Yes and Google chose asking too much and chose to leave China walking away from billions.
Versus Apple gave all their user private data for a buck.
But even worse
https://www.ft.com/content/ad42e536-cf36-11e7-b781-794ce08b24dc
Apple drops hundreds of VPN apps at Beijing's request
Versus google doing the ultimate FU.
https://www.androidauthority.com/using-google-fi-in-china-850456/
Using Project Fi in China: Say goodbye to VPNs - Android Authority
I like looking at actual actions instead of marketing. Apple hypocrisy is unmatched.
|
technology
|
Yes same for Google. But Google chose to leave as some things more important versus Apple gave up all their uses private data for a buck.
But love the FU from Google
https://www.androidauthority.com/using-google-fi-in-china-850456/
Using Project Fi in China: Say goodbye to VPNs - Android Authority
But sad to see Apple
https://www.ft.com/content/ad42e536-cf36-11e7-b781-794ce08b24dc
Apple drops hundreds of VPN apps at Beijing's request
I care about actual actions and not marketing.
Apple hypocrisy is unmatched.
My biggest issue is the hypocrisy.
I am also thank full that Google did the right thing and shame on Apple.
Apple gave up more data and far more private then FB with Cambridge analytics.
I am not aware of Google ever doing something similar to either? Are you?
|
technology
|
Yes same for Google. But Google chose to leave as some things more important versus Apple gave up all their uses privete data for a buck.
But love the FU from Google
https://www.androidauthority.com/using-google-fi-in-china-850456/
Using Project Fi in China: Say goodbye to VPNs - Android Authority
But sad to see Apple
https://www.ft.com/content/ad42e536-cf36-11e7-b781-794ce08b24dc
Apple drops hundreds of VPN apps at Beijing's request
I care about actual actions and not marketing.
Apple hypocrisy is unmatched.
The Apple hypocrisy is what most bugs me. Apple gave away way more data and far more private then FB with Cambridge analytics. Not aware of Google ever doing anything like either company.
Plus I thank Google for doing the right thing and shame on. Apple.
Do you have an example of Google doing anything similar?
I mean actually doing it and NOT marketing.
Please share if you do?
|
technology
|
The comment was in response.
I am not aware of any US tech company that has done any thing worse than Apple in the name of privacy. Do you have an example?
Even FB Cambridge analytics which was really, really bad is no where near as bad as what Apple has done. I mean Apple shared far more data and then shared with the government and far more private data.
I am not aware of Google ever doing anything like FB or Apple. Do you know of an example?
Not marketing but real life?
|
technology
|
I am actually a pretty big Apple fanboi. But way, way before it was cool. I never used MS technology.
But just because I have been a fan of the company in the past does not give them a pass for the actions we have seen from Apple.
I also HATE hypocrisy. It is mind blowing the hypocrisy that is coming out of Apple.
Tim Cook to even mention privacy when NO US tech company in all of the history of tech has ever abused customer privacy worse than Apple.
I mean NONE!!!
You name one case where any tech company has done anything as bad as Apple?
Name one?
I am NOT aware of Google ever doing anything like Apple and we can see Google do the EXACT opposite. They chose to leave China.
Even FB with Cambridge Analytics which was a horrible thing is no where near as bad as what Apple has done.
I get marketing works and it is easy to fool people with words. But look at the actions.
Google does NOT share private data. Apple has been far worse than any tech company I am aware of?
|
technology
|
No they have been.
But not nearly as much if the top companies would be trying to get the top talent.
Say I get a 3% raise yearly.
If I go to a new company they must really want me and they'll give me much larger increases. If my original company wants to keep me they can pay maybe 8-9% and it's worth staying for me to not have that hassle to change jobs.
Since neither company is recruiting me... And no one will interview me. I'm stuck with that 3% no matter what.
|
technology
|
Voting machines aren't phones, there's no need to replace them every 48 months like people do with phones because the voting process itself (filling out a form them sealing it) doesn't change. There's not much newer technology can offer here, except more security holes. Consider that before 2016 there were serious proposals to do away with IRL voting entirely and just let people vote over the Internet because it's the latest and greatest thing.
Also if you were to fact check the GOP *didn't* vote against election security. They voted against more bloc grants for election security because:
1. The most recent claims of election fraud are being investigated by Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller whose investigation is incomplete, therefore it's wrong to throw more money at the problem when we don't even know if states (who'd be issued the grants) are the problem or if the companies they'd spend the grant money on are trustworthy. This has special significance given accusations that Kaspersky Lab, who provides anti-malware software, is a front for the Russian government.
2. The intelligence community and Mueller himself all agree that election machines were not themselves hacked or ever potentially compromised, a fact which President Obama himself stated before he left office. All of the "hacking" is focused on the 2016 DNC server hack and purported ad fraud/nondisclosure between Russians and Facebook.
3. The GOP's core platform is all about election security, in the form of Voter IDs and restricting peoples' ability to vote by mail. Notice how nobody ever talks about this anymore because now it's just accepted that people should have to show an ID to exercise their basic constitutional rights.
So no, it's not intentional. What's happening is that everyone in the government (from former SoS Hilary Clinton down to local elections officials) doesn't know how to use technology. And the GOP itself don't otherwise they'd require e-balloting machines to require ID swipes in order to operate. Everyone here is just stupid and most choose to continue to remain stupid.
|
technology
|
The only person who ever knew anything about "these issues" was the President at the time, Barrack Obama, who was the commander of the intelligence agencies who were supposedly telling him of an imminent attack on America's democracy. Obama, before and after the election, repeatedly asserted that the 2016 election machines were not hacked and could not be hacked.
If you're looking for a potential conspiracy, this is where it would begin. Which is why the current President started his own conspiracy theory about Obama trying to have Russia hack him (or some other nonsense, I stopped reading Twitter long ago) because Obama is ultimately the person who would know. Either him or Jim Comey, hence the original firing which spawned the Mueller investigation in the first place.
|
technology
|
The 2016 election is evidence against you: the *entire* DNC server was hacked because Hilary Clinton's campaign manager misplaced her phone, meanwhile there was not a single instance of any voting machine (or vote tallying machine) that was ever hacked or under threat of hacking. This is what the intelligence community has said and agreed upon, including two Presidents (of which one of whom, Barrack Obama, is not a habitual liar). All evidence says that election machines are more secure than any device that can connect to the Internet.
Hence why there's talk of having 3FA authentication using a USB security dongle or plastic card for email accounts in general, *much like how a Voter ID system works in the states that have them*.
|
technology
|
> , meanwhile there was not a single instance of any voting machine (or vote tallying machine) that was ever hacked or under threat of hacking.
bwahaha my naive little friend. our electronic voting machines are ridiculously easy to hack
https://www.newscientist.com/article/2142428-hacking-a-us-electronic-voting-booth-takes-less-than-90-minutes/
http://time.com/5366171/11-year-old-hacked-into-us-voting-system-10-minutes/
the reason that there is no evidence has to do more with lack of security measures that would cause tampering to leave a fingerprint than any real security.
> All evidence says that election machines are more secure than any device that can connect to the Internet.
that's straight up bullshit, that no intelligence agency has stated as all the evidence says the opposite.
btw: i'm a distributed systems software engineer. don't try to blow smoke up the ass of an ACTUAL expert
|
technology
|
>bwahaha my naive little friend. our electronic voting machines are ridiculously easy to hack
The second link you posted is wrong and ProPublica thoroughly explains why [here](https://www.propublica.org/article/defcon-teen-did-not-hack-a-state-election). Additionally, the intelligence community itself came out and said no election machines were hacked or were ever in danger of hacking, all of this hysteria over hacked ballot machines comes from the media not the government.
>the reason that there is no evidence has to do more with lack of security measures that would cause tampering to leave a fingerprint than any real security.
Wrong, ffs the FBI blames Russia's government for the DNC hack based upon the most generic nonsecurity information available; IP addresses they got right from telecom companies that routed the hacks.
>that's straight up bullshit, that no intelligence agency has stated as all the evidence says the opposite.
You're wrong, to quote the actual [Intelligence Community Assessment](https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICA_2017_01.pdf): *Russian intelligence obtained and maintained access to elements of multiple US state or local electoral boards. DHS assesses that the types of systems Russian actors targeted or compromised were not involved in vote tallying.*
>btw: i'm a distributed systems software engineer. don't try to blow smoke up the ass of an ACTUAL expert
Cool, I'm an actual telecom engineer with 35 years experience in the field and was even paid to consult on election machines after the 2000 election. You mine bitcoin.
|
technology
|
> intelligence community itself came out and said no election machines were hacked or were ever in danger of hacking
no, they said there was no evidence any were hacked. that does not mean they were not at risk. every independent security analysis says they absolutely are. just because you want to misread reports to confirm your foolishness doesn't mean they say that.
> Wrong, ffs the FBI blames Russia's government for the DNC hack based upon the most generic nonsecurity information available; IP addresses they got right from telecom companies that routed the hacks.
I was talking about voting machines, not the DNC hack you blathering moron.
> Cool, I'm an actual telecom engineer with 35 years experience in the field and was even paid to consult on election machines after the 2000 election. You mine bitcoin.
you hook phone lines together, and maybe splice some fiber and copper connections. I write distributed systems at the operating system level that are mission critical to thousands of commercial and government entities. Security and networking are my area in distributed systems.
bitcoin is a scam that some fools fell for. one i wish I would have had the foresight to exploit and be retired.
you don't know 1/1000000th of what you think you know. so kindly piss off
|
technology
|
>no, they said there was no evidence any were hacked. that does not mean they were not at risk.
But they weren't at risk. They weren't targets in the first place, did you even read my post?
>you hook phone lines together
Yes, do you know what that entails? One of my jobs was to splice into phone lines to setup wire taps so the government could record conversations they had gotten warrants for. Another was to get into phone lines to send a signal to security systems to reprogram them using custom code I had to write on the fly. This is known as "hacking". Clearly, you're inexperienced at this and don't have much room to talk about it to others.
|
technology
|
> But they weren't at risk. They weren't targets in the first place, did you even read my post?
if you really think they're not at risk then i have ocean front properly in montana to sell you
> Yes, do you know what that entails? One of my jobs was to splice into phone lines to setup wire taps so the government could record conversations they had gotten warrants for. Another was to get into phone lines to send a signal to security systems to reprogram them using custom code I had to write on the fly. This is known as "hacking". Clearly, you're inexperienced at this and don't have much room to talk about it to others.
no, tapping unecrypted channels is not hacking. and you weren't even doing that, you were tapping analog lines.
|
technology
|
> bwahaha my naive little friend. our electronic voting machines are ridiculously easy to hack
Did you not read either article? The first is about voting machines bought on ebay with absolutely nothing to suggest that they run the same software that's currently running on voting machines in active use. The second is about a kid hacking **an imitation voting website**. They created the site just for the event with intentionally placed vulnerabilities.
|
technology
|
http://fortune.com/2017/07/31/defcon-hackers-us-voting-machines/ (easily broken into)
https://www.usenix.org/legacy/event/evt07/tech/full_papers/feldman/feldman_html/index.html (utter lack of security)
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/08/2016-elections-russia-hack-how-to-hack-an-election-in-seven-minutes-214144 (oh look mom, we can pick the lock and replace the ROM EEPROMs in minutes!)
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/21/magazine/the-myth-of-the-hacker-proof-voting-machine.html (REMOTE ACCESS SOFTWARE PRESENT)
https://www.wired.com/2016/08/americas-voting-machines-arent-ready-election/
(tag /u/bitfriend2, ignoramus)
Seriously guys, computer security is part of my fucking job - and it's not just me saying these systems are insecure. It's the world's leading computer security experts. it's everyone in the field who doesn't have their head up their ass. it's so one sided that [there is an XKCD about it](https://xkcd.com/2030/)
#Why do you persist in trying to claim that the current electronic voting machine designs are not a goddamn security disaster?
|
technology
|
I'm not. I'm saying that the two links that you provided above were both pretty useless as neither proved anything. The first link that you provided here is similar. Hacking something at defcon and hacking something at an actual voting location are two **very** different things. Where's the news report about it actually happening to an in-use voting machine on voting day?
Your second link requires taking the machine apart. Is there any evidence of someone doing this to any voting machine that was actually being used?
Third link, once again, is someone breaking into a **decommissioned** voting machine that was likely extremely out of date. They also claim that you could replace the ROM chips with hacked ones, but that requires getting the source code first. Is there any evidence of anyone doing that?
The fourth link talks about one machine with a calibration error, and another machine that had remote access software that had only been accessed by authorized personnel. A problem, but still not evidence of any wrongdoing. It proves the opposite, in fact.
The fifth article was about recalled voting machines from a company that had gone out of business years before. Yes, that one was pretty bad. Someone really should have replaced them sooner.
Basically, everything that you've posed is nothing but conjecture and hacking **similar** machines and software but **not identical**. It proves absolutely nothing. Yes, there's probably a big issue that needs to be addressed. But as was already pointed out to you, that's currently under investigation and **nothing** should be done until that investigation is complete as we still don't know what exactly needs fixing.
If you work in security, you should know better. Essentially what you're saying is that "My cousin heard from his friend that your software is vulnerable" is actionable evidence. Which software? Vulnerable how? Until those questions are answered, it would be stupid to start changing things blindly. That's exactly what's being done right now. The answers to those questions are being investigated. Right now anyone claiming to have those answers is making it up, as **there is absolutely no evidence of any elections actually being hacked, despite "experts" claiming over and over how easy it is**. If it's so easy, why aren't we seeing it happen? It should be pretty obvious. Sure, some will be smart about it and make the numbers look believable. Many wouldn't. And if it really can be done by absolutely anyone, where are those obvious cases?
|
technology
|
Why are you so invested in defending electronic voting machines? we know their security is shit.
Have you ever considered some of us may be privy to information that we cannot link you?
Have you ever considered that some of the best links are buried under pages and pages of infotainment links?
fuck dude, Diebold Voting Systems (ran by two guys who were felons related to election tampering!) thought that an unencrypted microsoft access database file was a secure audit!
|
technology
|
I'm not defending anything except the need for facts, which you seem to lack. Yes, there seems to be a problem. But you don't go redoing the entire country's voting systems based on the assumption that something is wrong somewhere. You first investigate what's wrong, and then you act on it. So far, most of the evidence has ranged from anecdotal to completely made up. Your own posts offering a fictional web site made up specifically for a hacking challenge as evidence just goes to show how little is actually known and how much bad information is being thrown around.
I'm not defending the electronic voting machines. I'm saying that we need to proceed with caution and base all actions on actual data, not opinions about what might have happened if things were different.
|
technology
|
Do you understand computing at all? Do you hold a degree in Computational Science?
Everyone, EVERYONE, in the field knows that computers are fundamentally insecure. It isn't "prove this system is insecure" it's "prove this system is secure" in our world, and almost always you cannot - it is essentially impossible to prove it is secure.
We can exclude systems from the possibility of being secure by demonstrating that their design fundamentally cannot be secured. Electronic voting machines without a voter-verified-paper-audit (all purely electronic systems in use in the united states) are fundamentally incapable of being secured and verified.
You're trying to hold this to a "smoking gun" standard of evidence, which nobody in reality should need to know a system is insecure. You're trying to handwave away all the evidence that they're insecure "oh it's an old version" [that rarely makes a difference - even the world's best shops have tons of unknown vulnerabilities in their latest editions], "oh it's just a mock up not the real thing [nevermind it's running the same software]", etc. Demonstrating attacks on the machines (replacing the EEPROMs in minutes, and without leaving a trace). **The kind of vulnerabilities you're dismissing off handedly should have never been present in any version of the software and demonstrate a fundamentally insecure design**, and demonstrate that the 'engineers' working on them are fundamentally not capable of writing secure code. That isn't surprisingly because writing secure code is a monumentally difficult thing, and the electronic voting machine manufacturers don't pay enough to attract software engineers who even know how to think about code security.
To someone who is an actual expert, who does hold degrees in the field and who has more than a decade of experience, you simply appear to be putting your hands over your ears and humming REAL LOUD.
|
technology
|
Being able to rewrite code from the ground up when needed is the wet dream of most good software engineers and computational scientists.
Recently when talking to a company i might go work for i literally asked them if they did this when needed, and was pleasantly surprised when they did.
There is way too much unupdated, unmainted legacy code in the world. Where do you think most vulnerabilities in major operating systems come from? it's usually the old code.
|
technology
|
Ok seriously, lets be real: The majority of people DON'T CARE ANYMORE! As long as they get their entertainment and instant amusement, all people will sacrifice their privacy. You have, I have...I think everyone has. So what CAN we do to fight back against it BESIDES unplugging? The big tech folks have planned this out for YEARS.... they use words to BS us saying they will respect privacy while at the same time installing spyware...and yet no one complains. They might have a brief moment of anger, but its only temporary...kind of like Orwell's 2 minutes of anger.
|
technology
|
> So what CAN we do to fight back against it BESIDES unplugging?
Use Linux. Use a decent VPN service. Use ad and script blockers. Pirate your entertainment. There still are people and businesses who will treat you fairly and with respect, you can still be "plugged in" to most things without having to give up every shred of your privacy. You absolutely can fight back, but it means you have to put some effort in on your own. Nobody will take your hand and help you over to the other side, especially not if you are the kind of person who will slam their heels into the ground and fight against your own liberation kicking and screaming.
"This is hard, I don't know how to do this and I don't want to spend any time learning, the other side isn't as convenient as this side and does not have all of the toys that this side has"…alright then, by all means, stay on your side. Just stop complaining to me and for fucks sake don't do anything to hold people back who actually decide to make the journey to my side.
|
technology
|
What do you mean, my own network and server? Do you mean networking hardware that I own? Then yes, I do have that. Do you mean a NAS? Don't have that, don't need it. I don't have that many devices, so traditional storage is convenient enough for me. Do you mean my own VPN so I can SSH into my machines from the outside? Working on it, but have been pretty much stuck at home for the last couple of months anyway so I didn't need it yet.
On the other hand…can you explain why I would need "my own server"? What would I want to serve? I honestly don't need the devices I own to be connected to each other or some outside devices all the time. So no, I don't have my own server, because I don't have any use for a server. Can you demonstrate how having your own server is in any way meaningful when it comes to getting away from corporate control and making your devices your own?
|
technology
|
You're one of those folks that always deny everything until you see it on TV, huh? Think for yourself for a minute. People who use VPN obviously have a reason to do so, and often the case is they have something to hide, something illegal, so it's concentrated interest for the government/s to keep track of it. US government spends billions on IT every year(that they tell us about), they have over 10k data centers already(that we know of), so what's additional 100 million dollars, hell, another 500 to fund VPN services? They're not expensive. It's not cutting edge, high altitude invisible bombers. It's servers with code in them. That's it. Information is everything in this age. And US spare no resources to get every bit they possibly can. And all countries are following the same path, it's just they're not at the same level as US.
|
technology
|
That still doesn't explain "the government" you are talking about (because if different countries run different VPN services then what's to stop me from getting my VPN based in a country that doesn't play nice with my particular government) and also ignores the simple fact that pretty much everybody can just go and start their own VPN service on the free market. It's not witchcraft, there is very little any particular government can do to actually stop a company from setting up a VPN service in whatever country it likes.
Furthermore, this discussion was mostly about shitty companies collecting people's data. A VPN service at least ensures that companies like Facebook, Google or your ISP have a much harder time identifying your activity online.
Do you think that not running a VPN will offer you better protection from government agencies than running one? Based on what information? If all of your online activity is already recorded by your ISP and your government can just force them to hand it over to them, then even in your "every VPN is controlled by *the* government" scenario you lose nothing by using a VPN.
|
technology
|
Democrats can push for more than one issue at the same time. Medicare for all is a far more important issue and most Americans support it. The republicans will call the democrats socialists no matter what they do. Obama was a capitalist president and he still got called a socialist. We should not act based on what we think the republicans will say. They lie all the time. We cannot let their words control us. We can support the right to repair and Medicare for all at the same time.
|
technology
|
How many farmers are disgruntled at not being able to repair their own equipment?
How many people want actual healthcare?
It irks me when people blame the Democratic party in a manner like you did. It's like blaming the victim of a serial bully.
Edit: oh yeah lemme pour some out for my tariff-loving farmer homeboys. They’ll get enough money from federal bailouts to repair their tractors, so we don’t need to worry
|
technology
|
I love the delusional view that one issue is magically going to make Republicans shift parties as well. Yeah, the people buying the idea that Climate Change is fake and that all the Media is liberally owned and lying regularly to us but Fox news or Youtube tell it like it is are totally going to flip closer to sanity over one issue.
The entire Republican voter base is "If a Democrat did it, it is bad no matter what." "If a Republican does it, who cares?" or "They are lying to smear him!" Literally every criticism ever thrown against Democrats has been applicable to most Republicans yet they are still regularly voted for. Republicans don't care about policy unless you have an R in front of your name and do the opposite of what Democrats currently want.
|
technology
|
This. I have a super conservative family and grew up in NC all my life. The only thing you will get is "It is the Dems fault" out of anything they concede. I have swayed my parents on issues over the years, but it literally took kid gloves and careful explaining of nuance to every single issue that came up relentlessly dozens of times over those several years. Even now, they still defend Trump every now and then and only MIGHT consider someone like Bernie over him because of healthcare. It is insanely difficult to undo the southern brainwashing that goes on.
I've had several people unironically tell me to check the history books when they argued that the Civil War was fought over states rights. Which History book would that be? Since it clearly wasn't in mine and their reasons for succession sure mentioned slavery a lot as their primary concern for people who didn't care about slavery.
|
technology
|
> Medicare for all is a far more important issue and most Americans support it.
Problem is, taking the steps nessicariy to actually implement this is far more difficult than people seem to believe; hence why you get half-measures like Obama's healthcare plan. What the US's healthcare system needs is to be redesigned from the ground up, with no vestiges of the past system remaining. The majority of the issue centers around the status quo of insurance and hospital administration as well as a long history of neglecting the implementation of system and organization improvements. This is by no means not the only issue either.
The reason why universal healthcare isn't a thing isn't because of hospital administration, or republicans, or insurance companies, or the government regulations. It's a long list of things that would take time and coordination far exceeding the term limit of a single president.
|
technology
|
The reason for that is because a major portion of the data input/gathering jobs in the US is outsourced to third party companies usually in India and Bangladesh, and or the visa system is abused to hire incredibly unqualified individuals from other nations for significantly less money. This causes pay in the market to drop which causes skilled people to look elsewhere in order to survive. This trend, which was mostly started by HP and their first female CEO, needs to end or even more companies will be permanently damaged by the side effects just like HP experienced.
|
technology
|
The difference would be that this is something that would have an immediate noticeable effect for farmers and it'll cost them nothing, whereas Medicare for all is something that costs them and they might not benefit from it directly, or at least they don't think they will. Trust me, the second they have to wait longer than normal to schedule an appointment with their doctors, they will lose their shit and demand it be repealed. They have no patience once so ever for any slight inconvenience.
People call Republicans stupid but here's the other side of it: they're selfish and short-sighted. They don't give a shit about anyone but themselves and their loved ones. If it makes their lives a little more difficult but helps others, they rally against it with absolutely zero appreciation for the net benefit to society (which includes them). Most don't even appreciate societal benefits or how much they gain from having a strong one.
The only things they understand are what's directly in front of them and what Fox News tells them they should be mad about. If there is more than 2 degrees of separation from "thing politician did" to "positive effects on my life", they can't see the connection. Complex ideas about cause and effects elude them unless it's literally so simple they can't miss it like "Congress passes law that all farmers get free blowjobs."
This is why you'll never get them to commit to better education standards. The benefits from it are far too many degrees of separation from the proposed laws being passed. Climate change is the same.
That's why right to repair is an easy win in that regard. It helps them, costs them nothing, and will be immediately noticable. Law passes, restrictions lifted, positive effect is immediate.
*That said*, what would happen is the Dems would get the law passed but the Republicans would take credit, and the voters will believe it because Fox News tells them too.
|
technology
|
The ones that have had to deal with John Deer likely are. Which is a ton of people in middle America. My point is they have a framing issue. Republicans just fling bullshit because is takes an order of magnitude more energy to refute it. Taking very popular bipartisan issues and running on those, which it would be hard for republicans to defend, like right to repair and marijuana legislation, could flip a lot of republican voters.
|
technology
|
This is not even slightly correct. The union did not even recognize the confederacy as a valid state.
From wikipedia:
The Proclamation applied only to slaves in Confederate-held lands; it did not apply to those in the four slave states that were not in rebellion (Kentucky, Maryland, Delaware, and Missouri, which were unnamed), nor to Tennessee (unnamed but occupied by Union troops since 1862) and lower Louisiana (also under occupation), and specifically excluded those counties of Virginia soon to form the state of West Virginia
|
technology
|
The Dixiecrats were beholden to party loyalty though and never aligned with civil rights. The reason they took so long to flip was exactly what Republicans have today, party loyalty.
I have no doubt Republicans might start flipping if Democrats swapped their opinions on something as insanely large as civil rights though as that is kind of the entire reason Republicans even have votes today. Guns, racist policies, nationalism, and religion are all they have and if another party started advocating for voter ID and tax cuts sure, but that is hardly a single issue vote, that is more a foundation for the entire party itself. Republicans would barely exist if it weren't for racial tensions and Civil war grudges, they would just be a small party of libertarians then.
|
technology
|
Yeah good luck! I wish someone actually paid attention in politics, but nowadays everyone's so busy stuffing their nose up the other's ass that they don't give a shit anymore. There are too many greasy lobbyists running around DC throwing money at anyone with a title to hope for any kind of progress that's not in the name of corporate interests. They'll sell everything they can get their hands on. If they can find a law to capitalize on the air we breathe, that will be next!
At least someone is speaking up about net neutrality, but I'm not that hopeful it will make a big difference.
|
technology
|
[Some states do effectively do that.](https://www.legalzoom.com/articles/who-needs-tickets-is-ticket-scalping-legal)
> another seven states (Alabama, Georgia, Illinois, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania) that require a seller to have license to broker tickets, and many limit the allowable markup to $3 or less
 
I recently saw Stone Sour & Ozzy. The ticket had some legal text about New York and how the ticket price couldn't be above $X of the price listed on the ticket.
Great show. The venue (PNC Bank Arts Center) blew ass, tho.
|
technology
|
No, that seems fine to me.
The issue is that regular tickets should be bought with a credit card with a billing address, and each billing address should only be allowed a limited number of tickets.
It used to be illegal to scalp tickets in Canada, then 3 years ago they changed the law, and now you can just buy expensive resold tickets, there are websites that come up when you google search the event center that are sham sites that only contain resold tickets, the scalpers buy hundreds of tickets to every show and sell them at a markup.
|
technology
|
>but I really wish they would just make it illegal to sell tickets above face value
Why would I buy season tickets for my local NBA team then?
Some games sell way below face value. If I can't make it to that game and need to unload the tickets I end up losing money. Which is fine right now, because I can make up that loss on a game when the Warriors or another team that commands higher prices are in town. You're suggesting I just eat the cost of bad games and then get face value for good games?
I'd just stop buying season tickets. I'm not doing this to make money, but life gets in the way of going to 41 games a year. A policy like the one you're suggesting ends up not just attacking scalpers but random fans too.
|
technology
|
>Some games sell way below face value. If I can't make it to that game and need to unload the tickets I end up losing money.
So you want season ticket holders to always come out worse off. Not ever to be made whole. Why would anyone ever buy season tickets then?
So instead of tickets being in the hands of fans, you want it in ticketmasters purview.
You're making no sense, just being blindly indignant.
|
technology
|
Agree and i have even watch the youtube video of unbox therapy and he even compared it with the iphone 4 having the same ppi... note older version of iphone has 3.5 inches to 4.0 inch so that ppi is still good, but i doubt when it is on a 6.1 inch LCD. Its a large screen already so you will notice a big difference between a full HD and a Hd resolution only. Hahaha
|
technology
|
Still more pixels than an iPhone 6-8, and those screens still look fantastic. By the numbers they're a fair way behind the highest DPI screens out there, but in practice they're great screens, at a resolution which doesn't tax the GPU/battery excessively as some of the highest resolution screens can.
Remember that most people are still happy with 1920x1080 or so for a 24" PC monitor at maybe 50cm-1m distance. Most 'lower res' phone still exceed that even when taking the closer viewing distance into account. Beyond a certain point (passed a while back), phone screen resolutions are becoming like camera megapixels, they're more of a marketing number than a practical improvement
Also remember that OLED phones tend to have [PenTile matrix](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PenTile_matrix_family) screens, so the 'pixels' aren't complete pixels with independent R, G and B subpixels - you're not quite getting the advertised resolution anyway.
|
technology
|
I think the best way to summarise all of this is as follows:
​
1. There are a small number of people (myself included) who will not want such a low density screen because we are used to higher density screens
2. The rest of the world who doesn't care.
People in the first bucket trying to convince people in bucket 2 to avoid this phone because of the screen are just idiots in my opinion. Who cares!
|
technology
|
I had an iPhone 8 and iPhone X side by side the other day. I was actively looking for the difference that the resolution makes, but really struggled to see it.
On text, from a normal viewing distance, I could see no difference. On fine diagonal lines (e.g. the Safari icon), I could just about make out improved sharpness, but it was barely noticable.
My eyesight is OK, but it must take significantly better eyesight to make the difference really clear. But I also suspect that the PenTile Matrix tech is reducing the benefits of adding more (partial) pixels.
My eyes however, are *very* sensitive to poor framerates... I also acknowledge that the Retina screens on Macbook Pros are a huge step forward, and an 'average' 1080p-ish PC monitor does look fairly poor in comparison. Just a shame that high-DPI on Windows doesn't really work well (unless you have fantastic eyesight and can manage without any scaling...)
|
technology
|
For low detail video? No. For small text and other sharp details in media in high quality 1080p format? Yes.
Edit: 828p vs 1080p is a 23% loss in horizontal resolution. It's absolutely trivial to notice that loss in quality when reading small and scaled down text.
Edit: this is why you are wrong
http://www.glennchan.info/broadcast-monitors/scaling-artifacts/scaling-artifacts.htm
https://graphicdesign.stackexchange.com/a/110251
https://stackoverflow.com/a/13243833/2537478
http://www.idownloadblog.com/2014/11/20/iphone-6-downsampling-explained/
> On the downside, the system down samples everything by approximately 13 percent to the native resolution so some unwanted artifacts do appear which degrade image quality slightly in certain situations. [...]
> The lines are perfectly crisp when rendered into a backing store of 1,242-by-2,208 logical pixels. But after the iPhone 6 Plus does its downsampling magic for display on the 1,080-by-1,920 pixel screen, the crisp lines lose the black 1-pixel-wide gaps between each green line and a very subtle Moiré pattern is introduced.
Example: https://youtu.be/eH0hyh5cvbU
Downsampling to any pixel resolutions other than multiples of 2 of the original will cause visible artefacts. At minimum it makes small text fuzzier and harder to read. The end.
PPI has no relevance to this discussion.
|
technology
|
You're making the mistake of comparing natively rendered text at different ppi VS text rendered for a high resolution being downsampled / downscaled to a smaller resolution that is NOT a multiple of 2 of the original.
Yes the ppi is near indistinguishable. Native text for one screen at its ppi will look very similar to native text at another screen at another ppi.
NON-native text NOT at a multiple of 2 scaling will be visibly worse, and ppi has zero relevance. It's the scaling that makes it bad.
|
technology
|
You're missing the point. The human eye is physically incapable of perceiving details that small. So it isn't "hard to spot" or "fuzzy". It's actually physically impossible to see. What you're suggesting is like saying that a single molecule out of place is just "hard to spot". There are limitations on our vision, beyond which you just don't see it. You'd have to hold the screen 6 inches from your face to see that fuzzy look. At a normal viewing distance, it would look sharp.
|
technology
|
False
https://youtu.be/eH0hyh5cvbU
That's what non-native non 2x scaling does to high detail images
PPI is irrelevant, scaling creates artefacts. The artefacts becomes big enough by simply messing up details and making the errors large enough to become visible
Also, per the Nyquist-Shannon sampling theorem, the actual limit to make it undetectable is approximately 2x2 (4) (sub)pixels per photoreceptor in the eyes due to different grids and imperfect alignment, etc. So double the PPI. Same as for sound. Also note that the SCALING ERROR must be smaller than that (less than 1 pixel under double PPI) to be invisible.
The scaling error is clearly not smaller than that. A scaling error that takes up 4+ pixels on a <4K phone screen in small text is visible.
|
technology
|
By the default method of choosing phone screen PPI + the fact that errors take up multiple pixels, you need to hold your phone *at least* 2x further away than the intended distance to not be able to see the errors. (you will also still not be able to see small text...)
See the video above - the grids are visibly distorted when incorrectly scaled, and the error is only invisible if you're so far away that the grids themselves would still blurry even when correctly scaled.
|
technology
|
I wonder if a [watch winder](https://www.aliexpress.com/item/Luxury-Double-Watches-Mechanical-Watch-Winder-For-Automatic-Watches-Winder-Multi-function-4-Modes-Affordable-Watch/32871443496.html) would work.
These are for mechanical watches that keep running based on your normal movements while you're wearing them. But if you don't always wear your watch, it can run down. This doesn't damage the watch, but it is a drag if you have to re-set the time and date when you wear it again. So the mechanical watch winder moves your watch while it's in storage.
So maybe these could trick your fitness tracker into thinking you're wearing it (and being active). You could even plug the winder into a timer, to control how "active" you appear. Smarter still would be to set the timer for a "sedentary" level, then turn it up after a while. Then you probably get bonuses and discounts for increasing your exercise.
Of course, walking would also work.
|
technology
|
My insurance requires that I get a physical annually to get all my critical stats in order to receive a discount. This should suffice. Now insurance companies want access to your hourly stats for rate reduction?
I’m a very active person and have nothing to hide, but fuck them if they think I’m going to allow them to invade my privacy by accessing my hourly data. I’d do everything possible to provide them falsified data that makes me look good just to give them the bird.
|
technology
|
Nonsense. Facebook Twitter, YouTube, Google, Gmail were blocked long before any tariffs. Actually, we should be doing something in response to China's draconian Internet policy. We should be cutting off all trade until they open up their Internet 100%. There is no way we should allow the most populous country on Earth to live under such mind control. If they are the next superpower, it should be really nice dealing with 1.4 billion people who are completely brainwashed by state-controlled media and a censored Internet.
|
technology
|
It’s truly horrible. Whenever I’m there it feels modern in the tier 1 cities, great infrastructure. But the truth is there’s a slow suffocating repression you know is going on underneath everything. The people deserve so much better, but like the core of Trump’s base, a lot of them are susceptible to the propaganda and demagoguery of the CCP nationalists.
I used to have hope for Hong Kong, that they could have a positive influence on the social and political development there. Now it seems so naive in retrospect.
|
technology
|
No CEO in their right mind would turn down the cheap labour and... production-friendly regulations that china has. Sure they run mass internment camps, have killed enough to make Hitler blush, crush any opposition ruthlessly and stifle free expression and press. But switching production from anywhere to there is bound to look fantastic for profit margins! What do those CEOs do next? Why, I'm sure some of those extra profits go toward lobbying to make sure relations stay 'open' between the government and China.
|
technology
|
Other places can benefit from local caching so that data for (popular) streams likely doesn't have to "travel" the entire distance from Twitch to you, there's often a closer copy available to speed things up. I hear that Twitch never had any CDN or servers within China so all traffic was coming through the firewall/from abroad. That means that all data, always passed through the boundaries (and likely multiple times) and due to the traffic inspection as part of the great firewall things get artificially slowed at those borders too.
|
technology
|
I think I understand what you are trying to say but I don't get your last question. Which one of what? China sounds more like China. I agree with your second sentence though. While there aren't any specific bills passed banning speech in any way, there is social "justice" happening to people which is ruining lives. James Gunn, Rosanne, Norm MacDonald, etc. The government doesn't need to pass any bill because we are censoring ourselves. We are making it scary to try and tell a joke nowadays in fear of someone taking it out of context and using it to ruin your life. We are lumping in people like Norm MacDonald, a comedian, with actual hate groups. Even right wing YouTube channels like Steven Crowder are constantly demonetized which in turn makes it hard for them to thrive and voice their opinions on that platform. I've watched a fair bit of Steven Crowder and the guy is far from evil and is mainly a lighthearted numerous show which happens to lean right. What's so bad about that? Young Turks exist and that's fine too.
|
technology
|
Yeah it's pretty wild how isolated they are making themselves. It's eventually going to make it very hard to trade or do other things like explore space. I just don't see the value in wanting to isolate yourself when there is so much to gain from working as a team. China is a very important factor when it comes to North Korea as well so it's concerning to see them align themselves more with a North Korean-like isolation.
|
technology
|
But the reason there are no twitch servers in China is because it would require them to actually operate in the country. But, China doesn't allow foreign companies to operate in its borders directly, they'd need to instead make a "joint venture" with a Chinese partner who holds a majority stake. And many companies have complained that when they do this, the Chinese partner then steals their trade secrets.
So, yeah, not necessarily the GFW (though it could be throttled) but still likely government-guided.
|
technology
|
yeah ? China restricts not only America they restrict a great percentage of the world, and you're saying China BULLIES US companies IN china ?... thats not BULLYING.
If chinese companies have so called "free reign" to sell on US soil, thats US's fault. Thats not china BULLYING the US.
This is the US we're talking about. Same coutry that goes to war and killed thousands for fucking bananas. Nobody bullies the US, If it decides that china can sell on US soil, thats not china bullying the US, thats the US and its runaway capitalism ALLOWING it. And you think Trump's trades wars will fix it ? ... seriously no. it wont.
&nbsp
Do i know there are quotas on american movies ? Yes I worked in that industry, i also know that china paid A LOT to have some chinese actors and chinese product placement in movies like Transformers. The version they see is slightly different than what we see.
NO ONE bullied paramount to add those things in. Paramount wanted the monies from the chinese market, and they ALLOWED it.
The US already distributes movies products to 90%+ of the world, and you're saying its being BULLIED because ONE ex-communist country tries to defy the giant by attempting to grow its own market? Do you see how entitled you are ?
No no , i say again... no one BULLIES the US.
US is going into almost unrestricted capitalist mode, and the companies are ALLOWING It. And trump isn't the solution he is the symptom of a bigger problem, he will.. and IS making it worse.
You want a solution ?? Get money out of politics. Two party system is stupid, and the founding fathers already said it but hey its what you got so work with it, Whatever side you're on, i don't fucking care just get money out of politics.
But stop with this victim mentality of "OOOOOO AMERICAN BEING BULLIED pls pls stop china from exclude plsss".
|
technology
|
>The main thing driving down his numbers? The failed trade war.
Either that or: his blatant unprofessionalism; his over inflated sense of self worth; HIS NEED TO TYPE WITH CAPS LOCK ON; his general lack of understanding of how his actions will affect everybody, not just those in his own camp; his explicit pandering to bigots/racists; his constantly revolving inner circle of money hungry morons; his alleged tie to Russian fuled voter manipulation; his love/hate relationship with Putin. I could keep going.
The trade war is just the tip of the iceberg, I strongly doubt that it even makes up the majority of the reason that 60% dislike him and his policies.
>Looks like I touched a nerve.
You didn't necessarily touch a nerve, but spamming the same exact comment in several threads is just plain annoying, especially without any additional context. Try typing out your thoughts better next time.
Edit: trolling to troll the trolls just makes you a troll
|
technology
|
Eh, if you want a serious answer then it’s because the shift towards mandatory prosecutions was a policy change and members of the cabinet expressed the opinion that this was a tool used against immigrants (I don’t say illegal because legal refugees are also being separated) which runs against your version of the narrative that makes it just about procedures being carried out as necessary. The problem is that the technical definition of genocide includes the forcible transfer of children so from an international law perspective, it is in fact genocide despite not a single immigrant being harmed.
|
technology
|
"any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:....
forcibly transferring children of the group to another group."
This is the definition you are speaking of. You think this applies at our border?
They are trying to stop illegal entry. People of all races, religions, ethnicity, nationality, etc for illegally bypassing legal immigration. It may be wrong, but it is not Genocide by any means, to imply otherwise is sensational.
It always amazes me how many things people try their correlate to the Holocaust, Nazis, Hitler, etc.
Somebody earlier said Mitch McConnell is Donald Trump’s Heinrich Himmler. Seriously?
Everyone just needs to tone down the rhetoric a bit.
|
technology
|
You’re welcome to draw your own conclusions about the intent of the people responsible because that’s what this comes down to. While you may call it sensationalist I think a lot of people have legitimate concerns about the increase in nationalist rhetoric and it’s effect on policy.
I think that when *rational* people draw the comparisons between the current administration and the Nazis they’re not talking about pogroms or the Holocaust but rather the incremental rise of a nationalist, fascist government *in a democratic society*. In other words, the concern isn’t specifically about one issue such as border separations but a larger pattern of behavior led by xenophobic ideology.
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.