Eldakka’s Techdirt Profile

eldakka

About Eldakka




Eldakka’s Comments comment rss

  • Sep 13th, 2020 @ 5:10pm

    Re:

    it only has 500gig drive space.

    storage is expandable through standard USB external HDDs or by proprietary SSD plugin modules.

    if every xbox ,ps5 game is gonna be 4k and hdr the game files will be very large.

    The cut-down xbox is way cut down from the X version, 20 1.5GHz CUs vs 52 1.7GHZ CUs, not only is there no way in hell it'll be able to do 4k, MS has said it is intended for 1440p play. Therefore while the games are still going to be large, I would imagine the 'S' games will be smaller than the X version of the games. Even if they aren't significantly smaller, I wouldn't expect many games in the early release year or two to be over 100GB, still that's only 5 games without storage expansion or deleting completed games until one can purchase additional storage. Also, both the new Xbox and the PS5 are designed from the ground up for games to be delivered and stored compressed, with embedded hardware uncompression engines. Therefore newer games should all come in at far less than 100GB in their now native compressed storage format.

    But the S console is aimed at those on a budget anyway, therefore purchasers will have to make some sacrifices if they want the budget $299 console vs the full-fat $499 one. As is always the case with people wanting the budget version of something.

    But the thing I expect is that most of the people who want and can afford the X will most liklely not be people on a budget, who would either have decentish broadband (enough at least to download overnight) anyway and/or be the type of people (like me) who don't bother with 2nd-hand games (Gamestop's bread-and-butter) and just buy new games at full price or when on special. And are just as likely if they do buy physical discs to do that online as well anyway direct from a Steam or GOG (or Kickstarter) that offer physical purchase options.

  • Aug 22nd, 2020 @ 3:20pm

    Re: Re:

    Even with 100,000 satellites in LEO, all improbably in the same orbital plane (~428km for my calculation, but obviously they will be spread across several planes from ~250km to about 1300km depending on the particular companies plan, not all lumped into the same plane, thus the separations will be even greater because there will be far less per plane than I've calculated, but more complex as there will be several nested spheres of orbits with greater separations to pass through), that still puts them at an average separation of 140km. Plenty of room to launch a rocket through.

  • Aug 22nd, 2020 @ 3:24am

    (untitled comment)

    In the short term this is going to be a huge problem for astronomers. But not in the medium (10-30 years) or longer term. Why you ask?

    Because the primary thing that all these launches are doing is bringing down the cost of entry to space. SpaceX has already brought it down massively from $200 million for a large satellite launch (sole use of the launch vehicle) to something like $60 million for sole (reusable) use of the launch vehicle. And it's still coming down. It's even been reported (not sure if this is from SpaceX or just speculation) that it costs SpaceX less than $60 million/launch, but since everyone else is still paying $100-200 million at present, i.e. lack of competition, they have undercut their rivals enough for the time being, leaving a comfortable margin for themselves.

    Once Starship and New Glenn and all the others come online (e.g. follow-on to Ariane 6, ULAs project, etc.), prices will come down even further.

    In the last 20 years, there has only been one major optical telescope launched into orbit, Hubble, due to cost. With its replcement, JWST still not launched, not until next year at the earliest.

    In a decade, I think it will be relatively cheap to launch 4m(Hubble)-8m(JWST) class telescopres into orbit. Might not sound very big, but Hubble at 4m is better than any of the existing 8m-10m ground based telescopes, like Keck of VLT (operating independantly, one the hook em up into their interferometry configurations, combining 2 Kecks or all 4 VLTs into a single scope they are perhaps better). Therefore even small collaborations will be able to launch these types of telescopes into orbit themselves. With the larger launch vehicels like Starship, 10m-class telescopes could be launched into orbit relatively cheaply for larger colloborations such as 30m-class scale collaborations. Sure, they don't have the serviceability or upgradeability of ground-based 'scopes, you can't just add more experients to them, but you may be able to launch a new scope per colloboration every 10 years or even more often with the newer instrumentation.

    And long term 30+ years, with this declining cost in access to space, they may be looking at building even larger telescopes on the moon. Perhaps even bigger than the 30m-class that are currently under construction that a lower gravity would allow.

    I see it as a short term pain for the astronomers for a medium to long term atronomical (pun intended) gain with routine space-based or even moon-based 'scopes.

    And, hey, if the costs to space don't come down much, then the satellite swarms won't be profitable. They'll cost too much to maintain the swarms in LEO, they'll all just deorbit and burn up in the atmosphere. ~3 years after they stop replenishing the swarms due to cost, their LEO orbits will decay and they'll all burn up, thus opening up the night sky again.

    So either it'll be profitable because access to space is cheap, thus opening up other realms of possibilities cheap space access allows, or they won't and they'll remove themselves from the night sky in a few years anyway, bringing us back to the status quo in 10-15 years.

  • Aug 4th, 2020 @ 9:56am

    (untitled comment)

    Trump to Microsoft: "That's a nice deal you've got going on there. Shame if something were to happen to it"

  • Jul 21st, 2020 @ 9:37pm

    (untitled comment)

    Why Is The US Trying To Punish Hackers For Accessing Vaccine Research We Should Be Sharing With The World?

    Because, oviously, health and medicine isn't a social good, it's a capitalist profit-making opportunity.

    (/s in case it's not obvious, health and medicine should be social goods, even though they aren't treated as such.)

  • Jul 17th, 2020 @ 8:37pm

    (untitled comment)

    they found 404 errors

    evidence pages not found?

  • Jul 16th, 2020 @ 5:30pm

    (untitled comment)

    Now, there is some argument here that EU surveillance is just as bad, and it's perhaps more than a little silly that the CJEU basically ignores that as if it's not important.

    Even if EU surveillance is just as bad, the point is though, that the CJEU has power to hear cases against such surveillance and issue legally enforceable rulings against (or for) those EU spying agencies if an EU citizen does bring a case.

    This is not the case in the US. As has been demonstrated many times over, a non-US citizen has no standing in the US to bring an enforceable legal case against US Government surveillance.

    Basically, this is about whether there are remedies available to EU data subjects against such surveillance. There are in the EU, but there are not in the US.

  • Jun 27th, 2020 @ 3:32pm

    Ironic?

    The offensive statements and depictions in the training contradict the ethical duty of law enforcement officer “to serve the community; to safeguard lives and property; to protect the innocent against deception, the weak against oppression or intimidation and the peaceful against violence or disorder; and to respect the constitutional rights of all to liberty, equality, and justice.”

    Surely the Justices meant this ironically? Isn't there a SCOTUS case, a precendent, reported here on Techdirt a while ago, that rules that the police don't have a duty to "serve and protect"?

  • Jun 12th, 2020 @ 11:13pm

    Re:

    If he does not like the CNN poll he should just make his own poll showing how popular he is with the voters, he could call it The Alternative Poll.

    All he'd need to do that is a sharpie and a chart.

  • Jun 12th, 2020 @ 11:08pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    and one easy way to do that is government pays for all election related activities. They could easily take 1% away from the intelligence agencies and the military (the military could stand to cut many of their development programs, give the soldiers a raise and not miss that 1%) and pay for all of those election related activities, including advertising.

    And who decides where that money goes, what balance of advertising is for one candidate versus another?

    In the current situation, with only 2 viable candidates, Biden and Trump, how is the money split? 50/50? 60/40? 90/10 (incumbent vs challenger)? Who decides where the money gets spent and what proportion goes into what messaging?

    What if another cadidate pops up now, say Bloomberg decides to throw his hat in the ring again. Will the split now be 33/33/33 for the three candidates? He's a billionaire, will that impact the split? What about the money already spent, if it was 50/50, and half of that has been spent, does that mean the remaining money is split such that overall they'll get 33% each, but that means from this point onwards Bloomberg would get 66% of the remaining funds and the other two would get 16.5% each for the remaing run up to the election so the final overall split is 33% each? What if a fourth person joins in? Or another dozen? What if someone joins in to just get their hands on the money (e.g. the movie "The Distinguished Gentleman"), who determines if they are a genuine candidate to get a share of the election money or not?

    I really can't see how this'd work in any fair, non-corrupt, non-partisan, balanced, practical way.

  • Jun 1st, 2020 @ 8:21pm

    Hennepin County Medical Examiner

    https://content.govdelivery.com/attachments/MNHENNE/2020/06/01/file_attachments/1464238/2020-3700%20 Floyd,%20George%20Perry%20Update%206.1.2020.pdf

    Cause of death: Cardiopulmonary arrest complicating law enforcement subdual,
    restraint, and neck compression

    Manner of death: Homicide

  • May 28th, 2020 @ 11:55pm

    Re: Re:

    Even easier, just kick him off the platform.

  • May 21st, 2020 @ 5:18pm

    (untitled comment)

    Anecdotes Aren’t Data

    You are using some weird definition of data if you think anecdotes aren't data.

    Anecdotes aren't statistically significant data. Anecdotes often aren't reliable information.

  • May 21st, 2020 @ 5:06pm

    Re: Re: Re: GDPR requires takedown

    Why does your grandmother keep people in her basement?

    So she can have them for dinner?

  • May 21st, 2020 @ 5:04pm

    Re: Re:

    So you would ban photography in public places when children are present,

    No, I would ban publicly distributing - i.e. posting on public, non-private social media - such photos.

    Printing them out and putting them in your coffee-table photo-album, or a side-stand digital picture frame is perfectly fine. It's the public distribution that's the problem.

  • May 8th, 2020 @ 5:23pm

    (untitled comment)

    Unfortunately, time is a measurable thing

    Only relatively.

    Maybe he'd been travelling at a substantial fraction of the speed of light for the 6(?) earth-frame-of-reference-years, so for him it was less than 3?

  • May 6th, 2020 @ 5:46pm

    (untitled comment)

    The software is able to predict if someone is a criminal with 80% accuracy and with no racial bias.

    We don't need any sort of predictive facial or other sort of system to come up with 80% accuracy.

    Based on the incredible number of laws, ranging from local to state to federal to international, it's nearly impossible to not break some sort of law on a daily basis. I probably break several traffic laws on my daily commute to work. Daily internet activity probably breaks some law somewhere - most likely copyright.

    Therefore, picking any random sampling of any group of people, the chances are that 80% of them have committed some sort of crime today - ranging from speeding, turning without indicating, reading an article online, listening to a downloaded (and downloading!) an .mp3, to, hell, exceeding autrhorised access to a compiuter system in some readings of that law - let alone in their entire lifetimes.

  • May 6th, 2020 @ 5:35pm

    Re: Re: Is it enough?

    gah, quoting error. The last sentence in that quote should not be part of the quote /facepalm

  • May 6th, 2020 @ 5:33pm

    Re: Is it enough?

    They should include something significant that will make Law Enforcement sit up and take notice as well as face both actual personal and actual agency consequences that don't need taxpayer funding.
    That's what I thought when reading this.

    What the bill should do is introduce criminal penalties for the heads of the involved agencies for not complying with the reporting requirements - at least!

  • Apr 10th, 2020 @ 1:09am

    (untitled comment)

    that the Institute “failed to show that there is an imminent threat to the life or physical safety of an individual.” Yeah, not an individual, but to fucking everyone.

    Maybe with their request to satisfy the "imminent threat to the life or physical safety of an individual" they could attach a list containing the names of all ~330million US citizens? And for added punch they could attach a list of all of those who have already died as examples of who has already experienced an "actual and realised" threat to the life of individuals due to this pandemic.

More comments from Eldakka >>


This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it