People who want fancy cables didn't necessarily waste money buying what they wanted just because they sound the same. People who spent time testing if the basic laws of phisics work in a $7 cable almost certainly did.
The problem is stats can actually do more with all the data including obvious errors. If you start filtering out data where they miss entered lat log you might introduce a new bias.
They should share a specification (I know this is correctly called a 'standard') but the should have been a separate logo for each non-interoperable group of useful features (a different concept also often called a 'standard'); as USB has proved.
I mean we can all meme on investors, but I don't thing many people can submit a buy order whilst assuming they missed the AGI news headline because of a product name.
Ironically the only way I would ever consider robust anti-cheet is if the game installed a seperate bootable Linux witch didn't have the encryption keys for my main partition.
How many people tried for the novalty with no intention of purchasing? It being a thousand times worse conversion wouldn't matter if they are additional sales???
Yeah this article is very lacking in detail. If they A-B tested it though (which seems like an extremely basic thing to try before making a decision like this) I think that would satisfy your objection.
A good write up explaining how assumptions of network and security design have changed so much over the years. Also you have to give credit nowadays for not overly sensationalizing 'heebie-jeebies level 6'. I certainly continue reusing a connection I assumed was TLS after a cancel so was vulnerable to a DoS; but equally if the next statement was canceled I would switch to a new connection no harm no foul.
Unfortunately the can be many buffers between you and the server which "urgent data" doesn't skip by design. (the were also lots of implementation problems)
reply