Fantastic work. This is one of the best gaussian splats I've experienced. Especially in regards to the distant objects and sky.
I was surprised at how many more details I could perceive in the VR mode. I couldn't spot the "easter egg" until I switched over.
A 10% false-positive rate is awful. If the actual incidence is 2%, a test with that error rate could overstate the results at about 12%. That combined with the sampling bias could easily result in overstated numbers.
Randomized household sampling would be far preferable. That would obviously take much more time and would expose testers and the household to more risk. But without good methods, research like this and the surveys conducted in Santa Clara and LA counties are potentially worst than useless since they have the potential of misinforming policymakers and the public.
Why is Ring allowing brute forcing? Individual cameras should be set to only allow logins at least a few seconds apart increasing up to several minutes and perhaps blocking IP addresses with excessive volume. If they're brute forcing Ring's servers an application firewall would catch and block this.
I don't think that the above comment means brute-forcing in the "try a million different passwords in a short time-period" sense, it's referring to finding a list of known password and email combinations and trying just those. I would expect that a few attempts wouldn't trip any brute-force alarms.
It boggles my mind that Microsoft and other companies with a similar reach don't spend more time on core features and tools. Minor improvements such as in this case can improve the productivity of 100s of millions of users.
For the next improvement, hopefully, Microsoft is paying attention to the Ars Technica comments: save unsaved entries to a temp file when the OS reboots. A recent files list would also be an improvement.
> Minor improvements such as in this case can improve the productivity
Unfortunately when your sales come from hardware vendors and you have a monopoly those improvements have zero ROI and that's why minor improvements haven't happened until now when Apple has eroded their mind & marketshare.
Note, Apple's business model of selling direct to consumer means these small productivity improvements are noticed by the purchaser, which is why we often see minor improvements on their platform and not MS.
A big issue when you’re the platform is not competing with the developers who write apps for said platform. If MS included a lot of great apps as stock, it would impact a lot of vendors. Just look at how much the anti-virus vendors complained about Windows Defender and the removal of APIs those tools used.
Because consumers don’t care what a platform is, they want a usable computing device. People are thoroughly frustrated by having to hunt for programs to do stuff that, to them, is an obvious necessity that should have been easy to do from the very start.
System utilities like notepad are a compromise between “giving users what they want” and “not burning too many bridges or attracting antitrust lawsuits”.
How is that a strawman? You never interact with non-techies that use computers? Those customers are the vast vast majority of the Windows userbase by far.
Because it is always trotted out with the implication that the user is precisely as stupid or uninterested as the poster needs them to be in order to make their case.
You forgot "the government", which is really #3. Developers usually sit somewhere between "astronauts" and "things that from distance look like flies".
I didn’t say that. But if you think MS will ever put developers’ needs before its own, the customers’ or the government’s, you are sorely deluded. They give a damn about developers only inasmuch as it helps their bottom line, like everyone else out there.
Odd that they don’t; that’s been a feature on macOS’ TextEdit for as long as I can remember, and I have to imagine Microsoft is watching macOS for inspiration (and vice versa).
If Stack Overflow wants attribution to happen in practice, they should facilitate it by adding a copy to clipboard button that would automatically add the desired attribution to code blocks. This would have an order of magnitude greater impact on the actual amount of attribution taking place than simply clarifying the licensing terms.
That being said, I am concerned that the requirement for attribution creates significant legal landmines for anyone who doesn't follow the practice and many users of the service will not be aware of the requirement or it's potential legal impact.
It would be safer to move to an MIT license without attribution, but request attribution as a courtesy.
It would be safer to move to an MIT license without attribution, but request attribution as a courtesy.
Not just courtesy, but work to make it part of the culture. It should be. It is among professionally trained scientists and engineers, and this culture should be propagated into the self-learning crowd.
reply