One of the problems with them in their current form, however, is that while this is going on inactive sodium crystals tend to build up on the surface of the negatively-charged electrode, the cathode, which winds up killing the battery. Additionally, sodium-ion batteries don't hold as much energy as their lithium-ion counterparts.
"What we know is that gamma-ray photons from extragalactic sources travel in the universe toward Earth, where they can be absorbed by interacting with the photons from starlight," Ajello said. "The rate of interaction depends on the length that they travel in the universe. And the length that they travel depends on expansion. If the expansion is low, they travel a small distance. If the expansion is large, they travel a very large distance. So the amount of absorption that we measured depended very strongly on the value of the Hubble Constant. What we did was turn this around and use it to constrain the expansion rate of the universe."
Because they are electrically neutral, there is no direct interaction between photons, which is good, because it allows us to see each other even when there is light coming from all directions. At low energies, that's the end of the story as the interactions via intermediate particles are incredibly unlikely.
However, think about how an electron and a positron can annihilate into two photons. As the electromagnetic interaction is symmetric under time reversal, the reverse reaction should be possible, as long as sufficient energy is available. So an extremely energetic photon can combine with a photon from the background starlight and turn into an electron-positron pair, essentially being absorbed.
The author: Privacy does not mean stopping the flow of data; it means channeling it wisely and justly to serve societal ends and values and the individuals who are its subjects, particularly the vulnerable and the disadvantaged.
You are wrong, privacy mean stopping the flow of the data completely. No one should spy on your life.
The problem with this way of thinking is that it's very hard to define what 'spying' is, and what 'your life' is. This is best illustrated with an example - when you read this comment you'll have loaded a page on HN. That means HN's server probably has a log of your IP address, browser agent string, etc. There's a complete history of every article you've ever read, upvoted, commented on there for you (and the public at large for some things) to see;
Taking the first page of your comments and that favourite I can reasonably assume that you're a developer, you don't like testing much, you have a cat, you have a judgemental attitude about how other people spend money, you have a smart phone, etc. Not great insights but you're pretty new here. If I trawled through the comments of someone who has 20,000 comments I could learn a lot.
So... is HN spying on you? Am I spying on you when I read those pages? I don't think so. You put that data out there in the open. The same is technically true for most data that people say is spying - eg Google Analytics isn't spying on you when it tracks everything you do on 50% of the websites you visit. You're giving that data away. That's fine. It's useful. It makes the internet better.
The flow of data in itself is OK. It only really becomes spying when the data is misused. That's what people want to control.
Grandparent's statement is pretty absolute, but I find myself in agreement with it. Data collection is the right place to intervene, because once collected, data can be copied and misused at any time in the future.
> when you read this comment you'll have loaded a page on HN. That means HN's server probably has a log of your IP address, browser agent string, etc.
Such logging isn't technically necessary to serve web pages, and ideally shouldn't be done without consent.
> Am I spying on you when I read those pages?
That's not spying, because the user consented to making their comments public. (Not sure about favorites though, there's a small note on the profile page but maybe the favoriting action should make it more explicit.)
> Google Analytics isn't spying on you when it tracks everything you do on 50% of the websites you visit.
> Such logging isn't technically necessary to serve web pages, and ideally shouldn't be done without consent.
It's needed as soon as you want to do: non-trivial spam protection, context connection for errors/exceptions, dos mitigation, correlation of issues across browsers, and a few other things.
For most of those you could theoretically hash the IP because you're interested in matches not actual values (although matching either the AS or at least /24 makes things easier). But until we migrate to IPv6 hashing doesn't make sense (and once we move, keeping individual addresses doesn't make sense).
Basically the bigger the site, the more important that information is for operations.
You can do all of those things without logging that information. It’s a cheaper solution to the problem, but that does not mean it’s required.
Which devolves your argument into collecting this information is significantly more profitable. Which I think is generally accepted as true, but not nessisarily enough to make it acceptable.
Rate limiting prevents a specific IP from causing a successful DoS. You can log higher level information like county without linking it to a specific user.
In terms of hacking, building a secure site prevents this problem at the source. Banning specific IP’s in a world of proxies and public WiFi is almost useless.
You don't ban them forever. Banning specific ranges which impact you right now is very effective too. Also "building a secure site" at some scale is impossible. At some point you try to figure out where the risk is, how to mitigate it, and what happens after a break-in. You can't prevent it. Logging helps track specific behaviour and catch those situations. That's similar to fraud prevention as well. The fact that someone who just logged in from Germany tries to spend credit in a request from Brazil is important and prevents real crime. That kind of information needs to be connected to an account.
I think that argument proves too much. To a user browsing the web, clicking a link that says "check out this nice article" signifies intention/consent to read that article, not to suffer the effects of all possible JS tripwires including pwning their computer and such.
This is the point I was making about misuse of data. Thinking usage analytics on a website is a tripwire is quite extreme. Thinking that building a complete profile of someone based on their activity on lots of websites is a tripwire is quite reasonable. Hence the difficulty in defining what 'spying' really is.
If by analytics you mean something like a hit counter from the 90s, which doesn't require recording user sessions, then I agree with you. But if it's recording user sessions, I think it's a good idea to require consent for that.
No, it's a result of the article telling the browser to also download and execute analytics scripts. It's abusing the good faith HTTP protocol was built upon. That's why I consider ad/content blockers OK and desirable. They're a way for users to express that they don't consent to loading and execution of some resources.
No, spying does not require malicious intent. If you look through your neighbours' blinds every night, just to ensure they're doing well, you're still invading their privacy and spying on them.
By definition spying is to collect information furtively, which I think qualifies the behaviour of all internet trackers as 90% of the population is unaware of their existence and 99% of the population doesn't know the extent of their consolidated online profile. The uncontrolled collection of data is itself harmful, that's why the GDPR requires companies to justify the pieces of information they collect.
Disagree. Information wants to be free. Good luck trying to stop the flow of data. The solution of privacy should be embrace the flow of data or even increase it by increasing transparency. Sure, there are going to be issue in regards data being public and thats what should be fixed instead.
The scientist who find the point where super position stops will get the Nobel price for sure, I could give you a hint, it is less than my cat, I'm sure it never been in two places at once (Schrödinger is right about his cat too)
Something I don't quite understand about quantum mechanics and the MWI... At the point the atom passes through the diffraction grating, it has a quantum superposition. According to MWI, reality has "branched", right?
Then the two realities interfere with each other to form the probabilistic pattern at the detector. So, according to MWI, reality has "merged" again?
If we accept the mulitiverse idea of MWI, doesn't that mean at some point particles aren't able to marge with their branched-reality versions?
The "at some point" doesn't have to do with time. It has to do with the rest of the wavefunction of the universe. If the atom becomes entangled with everything else (in fact, a single quantum-mechanical spin suffices) the two branches become orthogonal and the interference terms from 'merging' vanish. We say the wavefunction 'decohered' when it becomes too complicated to see how to reverse this effect---as more and more particles get involved it becomes hopeless.
Our cat is often in many places at once. He's able to remain in superposition between the garden, the sofa and our bed until I open the fridge, whereupon his wave-function collapses and he's instantly in the kitchen without moving through the intervening space.
In any case, the cat is the boss in all instances. My cat is very disappointed in me right now that I can't stop the onset of winter and demonstrates it very effectively!
There is probably some space-time position where he is completely content but I think that's rarer than seeing him in two places at once.
Superposition doesn't stop, or that at least is what I understand. The uncertainty principle can be expressed in terms of increments of energy and increments of time: the farer I could be from where I am supposed to be, so to say (that is the energy increment) is inversely proportional to the time that can be measured (that is the time increment).
However, given that I'm no expert on the topic, I wish someone in a better position could elaborate on this idea.
It's funny that most of these super hyped up mechanical keyboards still use traditional staggered non-split layout that will still contribute to developing RSI sooner or later.
I feel bad for the shoulders and hands of all those geeks using their tiny $600 cramped keyboards.
Any keyboard that does not separate into two independent halves (like ErgoDox or Matias ErgoPro) is horrible for posture and ergonomics.
https://shop.keyboard.io/products/model-01-keyboard is my keyboard of choice for most tasks, and certainly for typing. It's both split and ortholinear. It uses Mathias Quiet Click switches and custom-formed keycaps for the design.
I hate apps that run in background and do not trust it at all, fuck yaah, I like Android when he stop this shitty apps. 99% of times I'll choose not run in background if I asked for it by your app.
