- anton zuykov
- Last Active
slprescott said:Four reactions:
2. Isn't 1000 feet separation too close for safety?
3. Shouldn't he "keep his eyes on the road"?
4. What about the "cell phones can interrupt flight operations" claim?
3. He keeps his eyes on the instrumentation and occasionally - looks outside.
4. Not when you are at FL3xx. Cell phone signal might interfere with signals from approach nav systems when you land. However, when airplane is flying in cruise, it relies on IRS and GPS. And neither is affected by radiosignals in wifi / gsm part of the spectrum.
Rinsen said:Bull shit.y these people are creating such lies.i have used the old note 7 as well as the new safe note 7.i didnt get any issues.wonderfull phone.i phone 7 has lot of issues.but still they didnt have the gut to accept it.samsung did.thats da way a company should be.we salute samsung and always with themWhat iPhone 7's "lot of issues"? I think, you confused Note 7 with iPhone 7..."we salute samsung and always with them"We? Who is it - we? The army of paid trolls, or just an army of brainless idiots?
JoeBee said:Economic boom, lol. Imaginary numbers while wages are down, jobs are vanishing, our schools are war zones and real people are suffering on the street. If Turkey is a disaster waiting to happen, it's only because they are a few steps further down the same road we are on.
The fact that schools are war zones is a responsibility of those who vote for local politicians and determine, what is done in those schools. In any free country there will be people on streets that suffer, if that was their choice. You CANT do anything about it for precisely that reason alone.
No, wages are not down, economy is not collapsing and the world is not ending. It is actually the opposite right now.
Stop watching/reading/listening to BS news that fed you that crap, and instead, look at the facts.
Apple clearly can't innovate.
They constantly fail by not being able to match what the top competition on Android side has to offer.
This is quite clear because Apple always screws it up by overshooting the mark (by about 2-4 times) performance-wise comparing to the top level Android phones.
"But muh customizationZ!" -anonymous android-fan circa 2017.
"But muh disk access + file manager + root access" - anonymous Android malware carrier circa 2017.
get fu-ed. Everyone chooses what they want, but not everyone gets what they want. That happens, when some people choose not based on the objective criteria, replacing that with emotional ones, instead. Then reality kicks in, creating some cognitive dissonance which can be cured by reading appropriate echo-chamber website telling its readers that Apple can't innovate, after which the dissonance subsides for the time being.
hodar said:So, if you think Siri is stupid now, just wait.
Try asking Siri a very basic question, like "How old am I", or "When will I be 59 1/2 years old". Siri will suggest websites; which is asinine. Siri knows my birthday, anniversary, the birthday of my kids, friends and neighbors (as long as I have the information in my contacts); but is unable to use that date, and a calendar to answer very basic questions. Voice recognition on Siri has improved - but Siri's ability to do anything useful with that information is almost 5 years behind both Google, and Amazon - which is pathetic - since Apple practically invented a useful Virtual Assistant.
Now, between Cortana, Echo and Google Echo - Siri is pretty much a dead last competitor; when it should be the BEST - by far.
rogifan_new said:Wait, so benchmarks and specs matter now? Or only matter because they’re ones where Apple comes out on top? How about doing a review of the phone using this chip and compare everyday usage to the XS. Is the OS fast and smooth? Do apps and websites launch quickly? How’s the camera? How does their version of portrait mode compare to Apple’s? Geekbench scores means nothing to most people.Sammy was the one who was selling their devices based on spec sheets, unlike Apple.That was quite evident by what information was put out on Sammy and Apple's devices commercials and in key notes.So, please, stop trying to gaslight everyone here, simply 'cause you are just butt hurt.
cgWerks said:I guess I'll take that age old advice..... if I don't have anything good to say...So, why quoting a smart advice, and pretending to follow it, when in actuality your post went against it?What purpose did this serve?
I'm sure that Chinese Companies and individuals will see their social scores increase by participating in these boycotts.
The Five Eyes are aligned against Chinese Telecom equipment, and as they should be. There's no odds in a telecom infrastructure from an authoritarian government known for IP theft.
If Apple gets beaten up in China, then I'm guessing that China will no longer be the supply chain for Apple Products.
The Five Eyes already has a lot Huawei gear. Nothing surprising in that. What is new is the US desperately trying to stop Huawei progress for technological and political reasons under the guise of security and doing so, so late in the day that the UK roll out of 5G could be put back by a year and cost a lot more. All without a shred of evidence.
China has an authoritarian government, President for Life, and China is adamant about seizing the South China Sea per it's claims, which bodes ill for international trade. Given the rampant IP theft, and Chinese Hacking, I'm not seeing why democracies would risk using Huawei infrastructure.
Great Britain is in the process of reevaluating Huawei equipment; the rest, including the U.S., have little in the way of Huawei equipment in place, and most of that will be removed or replaced.
"In Australia, experts are also concerned about cyber-security attacks against our institutions and businesses emanating from China.
For example, consider recent reports in this newspaper that China’s peak security agency directed a surge in cyber attacks on Australian companies over the past year; and that internet traffic heading for Australia was diverted to China for a six-day period.
There's no suggestion Huawei is in anyway involved in these attacks. But the government's decision to ban it from Australia's 5G networks was certainly based on concerns about China.
"A long history of cyber incidents shows cyber actors target Australia and Australians," Prime Minister Scott Morrison and Mitch Fifield said in their joint statement back in August without directly mentioning China.
"The government considers that the involvement of vendors who are likely to be subject to
extrajudicial directions from a foreign government that conflict with Australian law, may risk
failure by the carrier to adequately protect a 5G network from unauthorised access or
In other words, the government was concerned that even if Huawei wasn't directly controlled by the Chinese government (the vendor has always denied that it is), under the country's laws it wouldn't be able to resist any demands made on it by Beijing."
One thing is China another is the rest of the world. When in China, do as the Chinese does. Comply with the law - just like Apple does.
But how does it "denied" anything that was said here? You literally have just confirmed that yourself, while disagreeing with the conclusions of "China says, you do" approach. This makes no sense... We know that China spies a lot. We know that some congressmen were briefed on the extent of the problem and that is case that they are trying to conduct not just routine spying but rather, they are trying to infiltrate as many networks as possible to get IP. Guess, how would you do that, if you have companies in China manufacturing NETWORK equipment? SMH
Of course Huawei will deny it. What else can they do - say, yes, we altered all our equipment to accommodate wide-spread network info scooping the Chinese government is trying to do? Now, please, keep buying out stuff.
What are you smoking?
"we cannot accept a culture in which technology companies considers it part of their responsibility to defeat legitimate law enforcement"Rosenstein lying again. Apple is not trying to defeat law enforcement, but rather is trying to protect client's info via means of encryption.The fact that it will make law enforcement harder is secondary, just like walls and locks in doors makes it harder for the law enforcement to enforce the law.By that same logic, he would need to advocate the removal of those as well, or at least its regulation. The reality is - Rosenstein is a person who rubber-stamped FISA court order on illegal wire-tapping of the presidential candidate without using any facts to back up that FISA warrant. Rosenstein is the enemy of privacy, clearly, as he cared very little about violating the concept of individual freedoms (especially when a person is innocent). Of course, knowing that, it is no surprise that he is advocating for the "regulation" of the technology that would prevent people like him from collecting any info they want. He does not care at all that by "regulating" it, the encryption will be maid weaker and the keys will be made available to the bad players in no time.. Very dangerous person, but sadly not that many average voters care about that.