I’d guess that a lot of the encrypted systems had a password written on a sticky note on the desk or in the laptop bag. Encryption doesn’t do much unless you take the other sensible steps.
It’s more worrying to me that a doctor might not report a breach because the data is encrypted, but had the keys stolen along with the computer.
No recruiting, I started off by wanting to point out that military lawyers don't "make" captain, they are given that rank to start. Then I realized it sounded like a little like a recruitment talk so I decided to go all in.
Lawyers can commission directly as captains in the USAF (and probably other branches) as long as they are not too old and can pass the fitness test. I think they also have to have passed a bar exam in one state, but it doesn't matter which one. They can get up to $65k of student loans repaid and don't even have to go through the same basic training as everyone else.
So (b) is slightly less trivial than saying a successful lawyer would not make captain in the military because most lawyers are one conversation, a few signatures, and one oath away from being a captain.
Ah, I understand now. Increasing the index of the outer planets is what would make the fit better, and the asteroid belt is a good way to justify it (and happens to be consistent with some other theories about the solar system).
You need a system with more than two planets. A system with only two planets is going to be linearly spaced on any type of scale.
Once you've filtered out systems with two or fewer planets, you need orbital measurements with decent precision to tell whether a plot of planet spacing is actually linear on a log scale or not. Measuring a planet's orbit requires a decent amount of observation (since we can't measure star/planet mass directly and don't usually measure period directly), so unconfirmed systems likely don't have good measurements.
It's likely that most of the unmentioned systems get filtered out by one of the above two criteria.
Additionally, there are some specialist/professional apps that charge quite a bit and they would be screwed by a limit.
Example: the iPad is the defacto standard for electronic flight bags (digital charts for pilots), and the market rate is $75 per year. Higher end subscriptions with terrain awareness and instrument approaches are $150 per year. A rule designed to limit freemium games would hurt the EFB market on the iPad.
While the new law isn't the best, this particular course of action based on the law seems completely reasonable.
New law -> new warrant -> no reason to continue wasting government $$ on fighting a court case that now has federal law clarifying the issues. Microsoft gets to save some money as well.
Features like being required to delete (actually delete) your information if you request it. Features like being required to show you what they know about you.
Once you realize facebook/google/etc probably know better than you where you are going to eat lunch tomorrow you are going to opt out of everything you can, and that hurts their ability to sell targeted ads.
This is less attractive when you realize that all big companies will have a non-European subsidiary pay a non-European component of facebook for all their advertising needs, which would hugely lower the revenue base that 4% is calculated from.
Bulldozer and Piledriver worked fine, but never came close to "crushing" Intel's offerings. They were a decent option for specific workloads that only cared about parallel performance on a budget. If you cared at all about single threaded performance or had a few extra bucks, it was/is worth it to buy a comparable Intel offering for the entire lifecycle of Bulldozer and Piledriver.
Except it didn't crush most of Intel's stuff. It had more physical cores but lost in actual performance. That's why Ryzen was such a big deal, it's the first time AMD has been able to compete with Intel since the Athlon days.
Those have desktop class high TDP CPUs in them. The distinction here is that this is a low(ish) TDP CPU intended for laptops where battery life matters.
You're right, for some reason I was thinking Exynos wasn't ARM based because it wasn't Qualcomm- not sure why. That takes the list of ARM competition down to just the Chinese offerings, unless I'm mistaken about that.
Me too, but for a different reason. I feel like many privately held unicorns aren't really worth as much as their last VC investment would imply. If we get more of these companies publicly traded then we can see how much they are really worth, bringing a much needed correction to the tech startup investment scene. It's starting to look like the year 2000, but instead of a dot com bubble we have an "Uber for x" bubble and a couple other templates that get way too much investment money.
I'll offer a counter opinion. I subscribed to the New Yorker for almost a year. The New Yorker leans hard left politically and it was really tiring. I consider myself a moderate progressive and got tired of the condescending tone that most writers used against any person or group that wasn't like them. I feel like it's okay to have an opinion that's different than mine but you don't need to ridicule other people and shove it down their throats constantly. The majority of the articles they published were political.
There were the occasional gems but not enough to justify me continuing my subscription and wading through each issue. The good stories show up on longform.org anyway.
Being able to go toe to toe with low-power areas says little about being able to compete against full-power areas, and vice versa. Intel is a laughing stock when trying to compete in low power areas even though they dominate full power. ARM is the only choice in low power outside of a few Chinese chips and Samsung's Exynos, but yet ARM hasn't made a dent in full power applications. The two areas do not scale as easily as they sound.
Intel has been iterating their design decades longer and was in stiff competition for much of that time period. They will be hard to catch in the desktop/laptop space for anyone starting with a cell phone CPU.
ARM has not had real competition in their market, most chipmakers are licensing ARM tech, so they should be easier to catch up to, which Apple has done (with a healthy dose of borrowed ideas from ARM).
Right, but what they've said is "we've lost TM and it's going to deorbit sometime in the future. We'll watch it and keep you posted." Which is all well and good until you realize what they haven't said, and they've had more than a year to say it:
What they haven't said is "the reason it's going to deorbit at an unspecified time instead of an exact time is because we've lost control so we can't do a controlled reentry burn to have it splash harmlessly in the Pacific. So if it puts a few redhot hunks of ceramic through an apartment building there's nothing we can do. Sorry."
Everyone knows they've lost control, and it's not the first time a country has lost control of a satellite. But maybe they get some legal benefit out of not admitting the loss of control. Because otherwise they should confess, it's not like this is the first time a country has lost control of a satellite.
As signatories of the Outer Space Treaty they should give a heads up to the international community, and are liable for any damage that's caused by this event even if they provide warning (but could probably get out of it with enough political double talk).
What's interesting to me is that China haven't officially admitted to losing control of the station, they have only admitting to lost telemetry- so we must rely on external sensors to track it. I suspect (but don't have any real information on why) that they are doing this to avoid some sort of admission of guilt in the event that it ends up hitting a populated area. I'm not entirely sure but admitting you lost control of an orbiting school bus might be seen similarly to a kid that accidentally breaks your window with a baseball- it wasn't intentional, but that kid is still paying for the window. If your window gets hit by something, but the kid never admits that it was his ball ("gee mister, I lost my ball yesterday but I'm pretty sure it didn't go in your backyard"), then maybe he can get away without paying for it.
It’s more worrying to me that a doctor might not report a breach because the data is encrypted, but had the keys stolen along with the computer.