Even if you did (don’t eat batteries), the voltage range is much lower and you probably wouldn’t feel anything.
Even if you did (don’t eat batteries), the voltage range is much lower and you probably wouldn’t feel anything.
Now if it was added to rechargeable batteries, it would be pretty useful
I think the reason we haven’t seen that is that NiMH rechargeables have fairly stable voltage during discharge while alkalines don’t.
I use Firefox almost all the time, but I’ve run into a few sites that act up, and the rate seems to be increasing. Sometimes I complain.
When Firefox had a tiny set of permitted extensions, I used Kiwi most of the time.
There are better ways to assess the legitimacy of a media outlet than critiquing its web design. The Wikipedia page might be a good start.
I don’t like the loginwall, but it doesn’t require payment.
The biggest reason is most likely that the cases had different judges.
My initial reading of the reporting on this ruling suggests it won’t do that. App developers can opt out of most of the provisions, but Google may not pressure them to do so.
Extension developer information from Firefox explains why it was necessary to make some technical changes. What they’ve never explained to my satisfaction is why they took a cautious, curated approach to it reminiscent of Apple.
The typical approach of a large open source project is to put a “here there be dragons” sign on unstable features and let anyone who wishes to use them anyway do so at their own risk, and that’s the approach I prefer.
Kiwi Browser has offered an Android build of Chromium that will install and attempt to run any extension available for desktop Chrome. Most of them work.
Firefox also recently regained reasonable extension support on Android, which was a slow and frustrating process for those of us who had used it before.
Why would someone own 8 vehicles?
Car collectors exist, and I have the impression quite a few of them are among the Cybertruck’s early adopters.
They wanted full access to the user’s Google Drive. That’s a permission Google is very reluctant to hand out because some users (perhaps unwisely) store large amounts of sensitive information there, and very few apps actually need direct access.
Even if an editor app needs access to arbitrary files on Google Drive that it did not create, it can use the Android file picker. This seems like a case of an app developer failing to follow the good practice of minimizing permissions. I have complaints about Google and the Android ecosystem, but having high requirements for unrestricted access to Google Drive is not one of them.
When I try to recall the few non-gendered public bathrooms I’ve been in, they all had private stalls with real doors. It was nice. I’d be happy if all public bathrooms were like that.
You probably can’t fit a large enough explosive in a cell phone battery compartment to reliably crash a plane by exploding it anywhere in the passenger cabin, though that seems like more of an airport security thing than a customs thing.
I remember getting a boarding pass from an airline that was only offered in their app or printed at the airport, no email/download image/PDF option. I didn’t have to install their app, but I would have had to waste time at the airport otherwise. I removed it when I was done and left it a negative review.
The number I remember seeing was that on average, app users are seven times more profitable than web users. Sorry, no citation.
I suspect there’s some selection bias in that regular/loyal users of a particular product or service are more likely to install the app, but it also affords the company greater access to send notifications and collect data. On the rare occasion that I install some random company’s app for a specific benefit, I remove it when I’m done.
It’s likely the harassers can be prosecuted for false imprisonment, a misdemeanor. It is illegal to use deadly force such as hitting people with cars to prevent/terminate a misdemeanor.
here’s not really anything of that nature for tech stuff
The Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act does not exclude tech stuff. The problem is that it’s a lot harder to work on tech stuff without insider information than 1970s cars.
He can’t. He’s paralyzed and his exoskeleton is broken.
On a more serious note, the 404media article (login wall) reports the problem was that the wristwatch controller for the exoskeleton had its battery wire’s solder joint break. They seem to be trying to frame it as a right to repair issue, but that’s a trivial repair for anyone with basic electronics experience.
If I feel threatened in my car, I am not allowed to run over the person
You are not allowed to run people over merely because you feel threatened.
You are allowed to use deadly force, in the USA when you reasonably believe that it is necessary to prevent someone from unlawfully killing, causing serious physical injury, or committing a short list of violent felonies. The harassment described in the article probably does not rise to that level, though an ambitious lawyer might try to describe intentionally causing the car to stop as carjacking or kidnapping.
PRNGs aren’t random at all; they produce a deterministic sequence of numbers based on a seed value and an internal counter. Two PRNGs using the same algorithm and seed will produce the same sequence of numbers. The sequence is difficult to predict without knowing the algorithm and seed, and the values are close to evenly-distributed, which is enough like random numbers for a lot of use cases.
Here’s an example in Ruby:
seed = Random.new_seed()
=> 142757148148443078663499575299582907518
prng_1 = Random.new(seed=seed)
prng_1.rand()
=> 0.6702742156250219
prng_2 = Random.new(seed=seed)
prng_2.rand()
=> 0.6702742156250219
prng_1.rand()
=> 0.9667236181962573
prng_2.rand()
=> 0.9667236181962573
If you run this yourself using 142757148148443078663499575299582907518 as the seed, your first two pseudorandom numbers will also be 0.6702742156250219 and 0.9667236181962573, assuming your version of Ruby hasn’t changed its PRNG.
He’s already a convicted felon, and yet he remains free.
If you’re referring to the Logan act, nobody has ever been convicted under it in more than two centuries, and it’s probably unconstitutional. Is it bad that Trump chats with Putin? Absolutely. It is a crime? Unlikely.