GG1

gatorguy said:

GeorgeBMac said:

These voluntary, anonymous tracing systems are not tracing systems at all - they are, as the newer name suggests, merely notification systems (assuming the system worked at all -- where an infectious person enables the system to notify those he may have infected).

The only hope of such a system having a material impact on public health and safety is if the vast majority of the public recognizes and respects they have a personal responsibility to protect others.   But, with armed militias invading state legislative houses demanding an end to public health policies, that sense of responsibility is obviously not universal in the U.S.

But, even taking a less extreme example:   Take the case where a parent trying to feed, cloth and house themselves and their children working as a store cashier tests positive for the virus:   For her to report it and enter quarantine means that she loses her job as well as her family's health insurance and ability to feed, cloth and house themselves.   A few in the U.S. would do so, but most would not -- particularly as they see others -- even national leaders -- publicly flaunting and ridiculing the advice from public health experts.

These anonymous, voluntary systems are obviously better than what we in the U.S. have now (which is effectively nothing) but, from a public health and safety perspective, they are mostly worthless. 

So what is more important to us:   personal privacy (which is a myth anyway) or public health and safety -- as well as our economy (because, without effective testing and tracing the economy will be under continuous attack by the virus.)?

Why would she have to go into quarantine? No one but her would know, and then it's up to her to be tested. Or not. If negative no harm and no foul. If positive she should do just what you've been asking for: Quarantine herself to avoid infecting both her co-workers and her extended family.  I believe most people are not so selfish and evil as to intentionally and personally cause the death of another for money alone, and If I'm wrong it is not my fault, your fault, Apple's, or Google's if she refuses to be responsible. No different than someone in say Singapore refusing to take part in the TraceTogether tracking or notification at all. FWIW the last I saw the uptake from its citizens it was too low, 1 out 6,  to be very effective.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/singapore-built-a-coronavirus-app-but-it-hasnt-worked-so-far-11587547805
Sending government agents to individuals homes to do human tracking has become the phase two necessity. Can they knock on your door and force their way in if necessary?

In South Korea they've had a significant issue with people leaving their smartphones at home to avoid being "tracked" according to news reports so even in relative police states the 60% participation needed for truly reliable results hasn't been reached, and I suspect it has much to do with the personally identifiable tracking they want to do.
So now S. Korea is forcibly applying wristbands, ala US criminal house arrest, to keep track of them. 
https://www.businessinsider.com/south-korea-wristbands-coronavirus-catch-people-dodging-tracking-app-2020-4
Is George willing to wear a government wristband, and when the next local or national "emergency" according to some authority arises be prepared to do it again? And again? Are you so afraid that the possibility that someone might die is enough for you to encourage the limiting of freedom of movement and gathering, and the denial of personal privacy and choice, all of which would require new American law?

If you are I'd question why you'd be so willing to sacrifice everyone else's privacy permanently, and whether you may be endorsing a Singapore-like police state, or even leaning more towards the China model. I think that's the only way your ideas could work., and that doesn't sound like something that would be part of a Democrat's Presidential platform, or is it? I already know that answer, so what exactly is YOUR agenda?  Something you're not telling us? It's apparently not simply changing administration. What President would endorse that? What Senator or Congressman would, at least openly? Would your questioning of government decisions and open rebellion against it in words and deed be tolerated under a China model? Would you even have the opportunity to change Administrations under the China model? In 6 months your Administration problem will likely be taken care of. Not so much your privacy if you're so willing to give it up so easily. The answer is not to be a scared rabbit and give away a basic right but instead to put aside your stupid ideologies for the moment and allow the country to come together and work towards the same goal and with the same voice. Sure there may be temporary pain. There always has been, but never enough for us to give up. 

We've had far greater threats in the US during our history: World Wars 1 and 2 (were you in favor of Japanese internment?), the Vietnam protests (was shooting college students justifiable? Obviously not as it changed the entire direction), The Great Depression (which led to protections for the least of us), our Civil War (which resulted in greater freedoms for those who had been denied them and which we still fight for). Were any of those worth permanently giving up on the protections we are guaranteed under our Constitution? For you perhaps, probably a good thing you weren't in charge during any of those events. 

If we could all just stop with the silly and dishonest FUD of "OMG, Google or Apple is tracking me", giving your personal location and your contact names to the government, then the Apple/Google system has just as good a chance at being successful as any other IMO simply due to its anonymous and private nature. Properly informed, users should be far more comfortable with what our techs have designed rather the methodology involving personal tracking and enforcement employed by some governments. Have an inherent trust in your fellow Americans. We are not all as dumb or clueless as you like to portray us as. We've historically come together when the worst is upon us and if we're scared about Apple/Google tracing it's due to ignorance. Teach us or get out of the way and allow someone else to. Don't attempt to frighten us into giving up. You are not helping, which would make you part of the problem.

So continue with misdirection, false claims, political demagogue-ery, and "whaddabouts" concerning this and other things and the Apple/Google exposure notification plan is probably bound for being no more effective as just about everyone else's, and that won't be the only Covid outreach that fails. If that's your goal you're right on track. If it's not then think before FUD. 

knowitall said:

nicholfd said:

knowitall said:

It is even possible to print your own fully functional chips, it won't be with a feature size of 5nm, but more than enough to be as powerful as a computer from the eighties which is sufficient for most embedded applications.

BULLSHIT - you are so full of shit with this post that I HAD to call it out.  Show me just one example of a 3D printer that can print ANY circuit board, let alone any functional chip...

Actually I think most 3D printers can nowadays, its just a matter of the right filament and currently a bit elaborate changing filaments for different layers (you need multi print heads).
I would personally use a normal (non 3D) printer setup to print ‘chips’.

KITA said:

It's an excellent SoC and in a device at a good price.

If you're just using your phone for calling, text, photos/video and media consumption apps, you'll likely never use this SoC to its potential. It would be nice to see it reach more of the lower priced iPad lineup where it can make more of a difference.

Xed said:

It also beats most laptops in single-core performance, too.

In peak performance for specific tests, sure. When comparing to a laptop, there's a lot more than just what a peak Geekbench score (with pauses built in to prevent thermal throttling) can say.

entropys said:

GG1 said:

vmarks said:

rcfa said:

The whole point of the DIN Form factor is, that with proper cable adapters these should fit into just about any car with DIN or double-DIN car radios.

Yes, but DIN here just describes the form factor - it doesn't describe the wiring, and furthermore, no mfr uses the 2-DIN factor - they all integrate into their own fascias. Vintage Porsche owners are just lucky that the single DIN size they had used a faceplate for the 2 knob, versus having the holes for the 2 knobs in metal that would have to be hacked out, as early VW did.

There is a DIN wiring spec, but manufactures don't really adhere to it - VW and Audi have used the connectors, but don't strictly adhere to the signals on the connector. GM has used the connector, but doesn't put the same signals in the same position -at all-.

And wiring is another big issue: The infotainment system is integrated into the nav display on the gauge cluster, the heating and cooling are integrated, steering wheel controls... and even if none of those things are, CANBUS is, so there's no key-switched positive behind the dash, just negative and always-hot, with switching the unit and amplifiers controlled by serial data over CANBUS. 

And wiring adapters don't help matters: they send signals over CANBUS, but don't respect the rest of the car network very well, sending messages when the ECU or diagnostic tool sends an all-quiet signal, for example.

I've been making my own wiring harness adapters on my car (not a Porsche) to retain the stock radio board, have steering wheel controls handle volume for the stock board, amplifier, and aftermarket CarPlay, and audio provided by the aftermarket CarPlay. The point being, use the factory parts for CANBUS comms, use aftermarket for audio source.

All this is to say, none of it is simple, or perfect, even if it's easy enough to wire up.

Do you know of a single-DIN CarPlay radio similar to the Porsche one pictured above?

That would be the first I have seen and it’s a great idea, if expensive. Aftermarket head unit makers (eg Alpine or pioneer) typically have a pop up screen in single DIN units, so it ends up covering other parts of the dash like air vents. 

vmarks said:

rcfa said:

The whole point of the DIN Form factor is, that with proper cable adapters these should fit into just about any car with DIN or double-DIN car radios.

Yes, but DIN here just describes the form factor - it doesn't describe the wiring, and furthermore, no mfr uses the 2-DIN factor - they all integrate into their own fascias. Vintage Porsche owners are just lucky that the single DIN size they had used a faceplate for the 2 knob, versus having the holes for the 2 knobs in metal that would have to be hacked out, as early VW did.

There is a DIN wiring spec, but manufactures don't really adhere to it - VW and Audi have used the connectors, but don't strictly adhere to the signals on the connector. GM has used the connector, but doesn't put the same signals in the same position -at all-.

And wiring is another big issue: The infotainment system is integrated into the nav display on the gauge cluster, the heating and cooling are integrated, steering wheel controls... and even if none of those things are, CANBUS is, so there's no key-switched positive behind the dash, just negative and always-hot, with switching the unit and amplifiers controlled by serial data over CANBUS. 

And wiring adapters don't help matters: they send signals over CANBUS, but don't respect the rest of the car network very well, sending messages when the ECU or diagnostic tool sends an all-quiet signal, for example.

I've been making my own wiring harness adapters on my car (not a Porsche) to retain the stock radio board, have steering wheel controls handle volume for the stock board, amplifier, and aftermarket CarPlay, and audio provided by the aftermarket CarPlay. The point being, use the factory parts for CANBUS comms, use aftermarket for audio source.

All this is to say, none of it is simple, or perfect, even if it's easy enough to wire up.