Shin Akuma is a playable fighter in Ultra Street Fighter II: The Final Challengers for Nintendo Switch. You just have to know how to find him.
Akuma was already on the USF2 fighting roster, but Shin Akuma — his demon form, which appeared as a hidden boss in Street Fighter Alpha 2 — is also accessible. Even better: the process of finding him is a welcome throwback to a time before the internet was a thing for games.
To use Shin Akuma, you have to punch in an elaborate button combination — and you have to do it every time, since he doesn’t remain unlocked. Capcom mapped how to do it last Friday, during the publisher’s 30th anniversary panel for Street Fighter at the 2017 edition of San Diego Comic-Con (h/t GameSpot).
It’s not hard to pull off, just a lot of steps to remember. First, head over to the game’s character select screen. Once you’re there, do the following with each of the listed fighter’s costume color selections, in order:
Select Ryu, highlight “Color 1,” and hit cancel.
Select Ken, highlight “Color 9,” and hit cancel.
Select Sagat, highlight “Color 8,” and hit cancel.
Select M. Bison, highlight “Color 7,” and hit cancel.
Highlight the “Random” character selection box and press L and R simultaneously.
That’s it. If you do it right, you should be able to play as Shin Akuma until you restart your game. Happy fighting!
WATCH: Foam Man braves the marshmallow sea in Australia
from Mashable! http://on.mash.to/2tEz0h4
I ordered it on eBay. When the four-ounce envelope arrived from New York three days later, it looked innocuous enough. It contained a finger-sized black plastic box, a small black antenna to screw onto that box, and two glass fuses. It was designed to fit into a car’s 12-volt electrical socket (that thing that used to hold a cigarette lighter).
If I were to plug the gadget into my car, it would jam up the Global Positioning System signals within a 16-foot radius, rendering my smartphone’s Google Maps app useless and disabling any tracking devices that might be on my vehicle. That may sound harmless enough, but when one considers that thousands of lives (everyone in an airplane right now, for instance) and billions of dollars depend on reliable and accurate GPS signals, it’s easy to understand why my little jammer and others like it are illegal to use, sell, or manufacture in the United States. Every time I turn it on, I could incur a $16,000 fine.
But they’re easy to get online, and I’m not the only one who has ordered one.
For the last eight months, security researcher Vlad Gostomelsky has been operating sophisticated detectors around the country to find out who’s using GPS jammers in the wild, and why. His research has turned up fascinating cases of everyday people using the jammers despite the risks—he’s seen truckers trying to avoid paying highway tolls, employees blocking their bosses from tracking their cars, high school kids using them to fly drones in a restricted area, and even, he believes, undercover police officers using them to avoid tails—and demonstrates that in the wireless world, devices that you use to avoid detection can actually make it easier to find you. You just need to be looking in the right channels.
The sale and use of jammers, even by police, is a federal crime with punishment ranging from fines to prison time. Whatever a user’s individual reasons may be, the jammers can present a serious threat, scrambling the satellite signals that vital systems—phones, airplanes, the New York Stock Exchange—depend on. When one of them is in use, those systems can go haywire.
The Global Positioning System relies on precise time data being sent from 31 satellites equipped with atomic clocks in space; a receiver calculates its location by determining its precise distance from a handful of those satellites. It’s not used just for navigational purposes but also for precision timing to, for example, document market trades (time is indeed money). GPS jammers work by broadcasting noise on the same frequencies used by the satellites, so that receivers can’t pick up the signals. Depending on the broadcasting strength of the jammer, it can knock out GPS reception for a few yards or for miles.
In June 2015, planes flying into Northeast Philadelphia Airport kept reporting that they were losing the GPS signal on the last mile of their approach. An agent from the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), which enforces prohibitions against jammers, came to investigate and discovered a truck in a nearby parking lot. The driver said that he was using a jammer to disable a tracking device in his vehicle, and that he hadn’t realized the jammer was illegal. According to a governmental aviation safety report, the agent “confiscated the jamming unit and destroyed it with a sledge hammer.”
There’s no record of that particular incident on the FCC’s “jammer enforcement” page, which means the trucker may have gotten off easy. Other people have faced big fines for the use of the devices, such as Gary Bojczak, who had to pay $32,000 for interrupting signals at Newark Airport with a jammer he too was using to hide his location from his employer.
This is what can happen when technology built for—and still necessary for—high-grade military purposes becomes available to the general public for personal, and often petty, applications. People trying to avoid their annoying bosses end up taking out navigational systems everyone depends on.
The military has been planning for years to set up a more secure GPS system, but it is perpetually delayed. So instead the government is protecting this critical infrastructure by outlawing jammers. It doesn’t seem to be working.
I was leery of breaking the law to test my brand new GPS jammer, so I never used it, but I found people online willing to document their success. In a 2013 YouTube video, a man happily demonstrated how well his jammer worked and directed watchers to a site that sells them in exchange for Bitcoin. He plugged his jammer into a power outlet in his dashboard, causing the fleet-management tracking device in his vehicle to lose its GPS signal.
“Now they’re pretty hard to get ahold of because the feds are trying to restrict the sale and use of these things,” he complained. “I’m sure you can figure out why: They like to track us.” Last year, the FCC fined a Chinese company a record $34 million for selling 10 jammers to undercover FCC agents.
Despite their illegality, the devices, which sell for around $45, are widely available online, often from retailers based in China. I even found a few GPS jammers being sold on eBay, which is where I bought mine for $42. (The FCC guidelines forbid the use, sale or manufacture of jammers, but not the purchase unless it’s “imported from a foreign retailer.”) When I searched for “GPS jammers” on eBay, most of the results were for sleeves to protect your phone from being tracked, but there were a few listings for “signal boosters.” The product descriptions made clear, however, that they are in fact the opposite—signal killers that can be used to “prevent car and people from being tracked.”
I went with the U.S.-based seller who’d been an eBay member since 2011 and who had nearly 200 positive reviews. After the seller shipped me the jammer from Sheepshead Bay, Brooklyn, I reached out, identifying myself as a journalist, and asked to talk.
“This product purchased from China, we don’t know about this product,” the seller responded via eBay’s messaging system. “We have no stock. Please don’t call us.”
Ryan Moore, communications director for eBay, said GPS jammers are prohibited on the site and that sellers who circumvent eBay filters that prevent listings of these goods may have their accounts suspended.
“Additionally, we also work closely with the FCC who report them to us directly as well as the filters we have in place,” said Moore by email. “And, of course, any eBay user can ‘report an item’ on the listing page.”
To try to see the devices in use, Gostomelsky, who works for the security firm Spirent Federal—which, it should be disclosed, sells equipment designed to detect jammers—set up GPS signal monitoring equipment in his hometown of Philadelphia, in San Jose near the Spirent office, and briefly in Washington, D.C. His equipment is programmed for its particular location, locks onto 12 satellites, and starts listening; it knows a jammer is nearby when there are changes or interruptions in the signals being sent by the distant satellites.
He wanted to find out just how popular the forbidden devices actually are. In the course of eight months, the five stations he set up, which could detect unusual activity up to a mile away, detected GPS jammers 78 times, deployed by 19 different people or groups of people.
Some of the ways the jammers were being used, though, surprised him. While he was at the Washington Hilton in D.C. for the security conference Shmoocon in January, Gostomelsky’s station picked up on GPS interference in the area. Gostomelsky mounted the 20 pounds of hardware on his back and tracked the signal to a high school gym, inside of which kids were flying drones.
After someone landed a drone on the White House lawn in 2015, drone manufacturers like DJI began programming their flying machines to refuse to operate if they were in a “no drone zone” with a 30 mile radius around D.C. The kids apparently used a jammer to trick their drones into assuming they were outside the nation’s capital.
They aren’t the only ones who’ve had the idea of using GPS jammers for fun. According to reports on Reddit, cheating Pokemon Go players turned to the devices last year. The game overlays virtual creatures and arenas on the real world via a smartphone app; players have to go to those real world spots with their phones in order to collect creatures or to battle for control of the arenas, called gyms. One Reddit user said on the messaging forum that a “guy in his neighborhood” bought a bunch of jammers and set them up near the real-life locations of the virtual gyms he had conquered in the game. That meant that when other players approached the gyms, the GPS on their phones would be blocked and their locations couldn’t be registered in the virtual space—which meant “nobody could conquer his gyms.”
Another Reddit user who said he was on the security team for an Australian aerospace company complained that Pokemon Go players were putting jammers around virtual gyms in airports and were affecting aircraft operations.
A Reddit message to that user went unanswered, so his identity couldn’t be verified, but Gostomelsky said the claim was plausible. “It would be expensive but technologically feasible,” he said. “If they were attached enough to the game and had money to burn, they could certainly do that.”
But most of the jamming Gostomelsky saw was done for the sake of profit or paranoia. Gostomelsky lives near Interstate 476 in Pennsylvania, and would regularly detect GPS jammers in use as tractor-trailers went through the toll booths. Because the toll-taking for commercial trucks relies on GPS tracking, they can avoid paying through jamming. If a $45 device made your daily commute free, you too might be tempted to commit a federal crime.
Gostomelsky’s equipment fit inside a Pelican 1500 suitcase. He would put official looking stickers on the suitcases, for federal agencies that don’t actually exist, and then lock them to road signs to monitor passing cars.
Gostomelsky wanted to be able to identify exactly who was doing the broadcasting, so he included in his five suitcases four microcomputers with software-defined radios—devices that decipher radio signals. These picked up on a variety of signals that might be traveling along with the jammer: the list of wi-fi networks and Bluetooth connections a device was programmed to look for; broadcasts being made on radio frequencies typically used by law enforcement and security guards; and the signals sent by tire pressure monitoring systems. The last one is particularly novel—car tires wirelessly broadcast a unique number to the car telling it if the pressure in the tires is getting low; his device picked up on that transmission, letting him identify particular cars.
“I’m stalking end users with the data they’re broadcasting,” said Gostomelsky.
Oftentimes it was obvious to Gostomelsky why a particular person was using a jammer. People driving company trucks wanted to avoid being tracked on their lunch breaks by navigational devices installed by employers (and they would tell Gostomelsky that when he walked up to the cars and knocked on their windows).
Stephanie Voelker, a product manager at Geotab, which makes fleet tracking devices, told me their devices note every time GPS connectivity is cut off. That would presumably alert the company when a jammer is in use, defeating the purpose and arousing suspicion. But cut-offs are not unusual; on a given day, 1 out of 10 of their devices experiences a signal loss. So the company has not historically detected jammer use until it spread through a fleet, resulting in lots of cut-offs. Geotab now includes a “privacy mode” on its fleet tracking devices in hopes that employees will use that instead of jammers to protect their movements.
Other jammer use-cases that Gostomelsky saw were more mysterious. A couple of jammers who were flagged by his system in Philadelphia had unusual electronic signatures emanating from their cars. They appeared to have both smartphones and burner phones, based on their communication with cell towers, which he was also monitoring. He was intrigued, so he started moving his listening stations around to figure out the cars’ driving patterns, to zero in on where these jammer users lived. He wound up tracking one of the jammers to a house in New Jersey. He went digging through public records to see who lived there and figured out the property owner was related to a police officer.
He is now convinced that some of the people using illegal jammers were police officers. They may not have seen a 2014 warning from the FCC that the prohibition on jammer use applies to “state and local government agencies, including state and local law enforcement agencies.”
“I think they’re using GPS jammers on their vehicles so that they can’t be tracked home,” Gostomelsky said. An undercover officer, for instance, might worry about a suspicious target sticking a GPS tracker under his bumper to find out if he’s a cop. A jammer would ease that concern considerably.
Gostomelsky didn’t actually knock on any doors to ask if that was the case, though, because “unnecessary encounters with law enforcement are not advised.” You never know—they may have appreciated learning that sometimes, a method to protect your privacy becomes a red flag that attracts attention instead.
The most active and enthusiastic GPS jammer in America is also on the government payroll, but uses the technology legally. It’s the U.S. military, which periodically jams GPS around bases for military exercises. For example, in 2016, it jammed GPS for 500 miles around White Sands in New Mexico for 3 days so that first responders from across the country could practice operating when their signals were jammed up.
The military sends out a “notice to airmen,” or NOTAM, when it plans to block GPS in an area, but pilots don’t always become aware of the problem until they find themselves flying satellite-blind. NASA’s Aviation Safety Reporting System has dozens of terrifying reports from pilots in recent years about their GPS being jammed and interfering with their aircrafts’ operation; the culprit is often the military.
In 2012, a Sacramento-bound MD-80 commercial airliner wound up 10 miles off course due to military GPS jamming. An air traffic controller noticed and contacted the pilot, who hadn’t noticed that his GPS was down. The controller reported that if the pilot had noticed and tried to get back on course, the plane might have collided with an eastbound plane seven miles away that was flying between the the correct and incorrect routes.
In a more recent incident in April, an Airbus A319 flying over White Sands was jammed numerous times while cruising. The pilots didn’t realize it, incorrectly believing that the signal interruption was caused by their GPS units resetting themselves. They didn’t realize they were without GPS until they tried to land. “Stop jamming commercial traffic,” the pilot wrote in his NASA report.
Last year, the military warned that it would be jamming GPS over a 500-mile zone emanating from a base in southern California for six days in June. The affected area included Los Angeles, San Francisco and Las Vegas. After aerospace groups voiced concerns about the plan, the military canceled the exercise.
The Registerclaimed the GPS blackout was needed to test a “Massive GPS jamming weapon.” A Navy spokesperson couldn’t confirm or deny that, saying the military doesn’t comment on what testing is for. But it’s more likely that it was simply to give soldiers exposure to what it would be like operating in a scenario where GPS signals were lost.
But using GPS jamming as a weapon does happen. North Korea periodically interferes with GPS using jammers mounted on trucks that it drives close to the South Korean border, causing navigational problems for airplanes, ships, and drones in the area—not to mention any GPS-guided missiles headed in its direction.
Closer to home, GPS jammers obviously remain a problem. From his research, Gostomelsky now has a list of people who illegally used them, with enough data about them to make it possible to track them down and prosecute them for “malicious interference to satellite communications.” But he’s not looking to get people into trouble.
“We’re destroying this data and keeping it anonymized,” he told me. “But there’s nothing to stop city officials from setting up a similar system.”
Nothing but inertia and perhaps some fear of having to prosecute their own police officers.
As for my own unused jammer, I’ve decided it’s not a good idea to keep it lying around. The FCC requests that anyone with a jammer voluntarily surrender it to one of their regional enforcement bureaus. I’m planning to take mine in this week. The enforcement bureau for San Francisco is an hour’s drive from my house. I’ll need GPS-driven directions to get there.
The central bank of Belarus has cleared the way for domestic banks to use blockchain as part of their processes of transmitting bank guarantees.
The move, revealed late last week by the National Bank of the Republic of Belarus, came as part of a wider initiative focused on the tech, which saw the central bank organize and oversee its own blockchain network through its Settlement Center. Notably, the National Bank indicated that its use of the tech was not related to digital currencies, clarifying that “at the same time, there are no any conceptual restrictions as to the areas of the blockchain use in the IT sphere”.
According to a 19th July statement, a resolution on blockchain was issued earlier this month by the central bank, aimed at opening up the tech for use by Belarusian banks to issue bank guarantees, or promises to cover losses on debt.
The central bank went on to say:
“The new mechanism of maintenance of the register of bank guarantees will ensure the mutual access of the economic entities of the states being members of the Eurasian Economic Union to the procedures of the government procurements of goods (works, services).”
Next steps, the statement explained, include applications in the Belarusian stock market sector, including its over-the-counter marketplaces for securities.
“The implementation of the project will make it possible to organize this register on the qualitatively new level, that will create conditions for improvement of transparency and further development of the stock market in the Republic of Belarus,” the central bank said.
The leader in blockchain news, CoinDesk is an independent media outlet that strives for the highest journalistic standards and abides by a strict set of editorial policies. Have breaking news or a story tip to send to our journalists? Contact us at firstname.lastname@example.org.
Last year, calorie-tracking app Lose It launched a feature called Snap It, which promised to identify the foods you were eating just from a photo. By adding machine learning and computer vision to the mix, it turned the ordinary act of food logging into a high-tech affair. Now, the company is ready to take its app up another level with the introduction of more tech: personal genetics. Today, Lose It is introducing embodyDNA, a weight loss plan that’s based on your actual, well, DNA.
To get started, you’ll have to order a kit from embodyDNA.com for $189.99. When you get it, you’ll provide a saliva sample through a swab and send it off to Helix, a personal genomics company that’s in partnership with Lose It. After about six to eight weeks, Helix will then deliver the results through the Lose It app to your account. And if you’re an existing Lose It user, the app will look at your food log history to identify patterns and then make recommendations based on the results of your DNA test.
The embodyDNA test will essentially give you a series of insights about your body when it comes to diet and fitness. It’ll figure out what your metabolism is, what your fitness levels are, and if you have any sensitivities to certain foods like gluten or dairy. If you have a family history of diabetes, for example, you might find that you’re particularly reactive to sugar. It’ll also tell you if you’re genetically predisposed to a high BMI, if you should do more or less exercise, and what kinds of exercise you should do. As the technology gets more advanced, it’ll be able to tell you even more about your body and the weight loss strategy that is best for you.
Lose It’s embodyDNA is not the first program that has sought to alter people’s fitness strategies based on genetics. DNAFit, for example, offers tailored diet and exercise plans based on an examination of your DNA, including a meal planner and information on specific exercises you should do to suit your body type.
We’ve yet to give Lose It’s version a go, but hope to do so in the near future. In the meantime, you can try it out for yourself by going to embodyDNA.com.
Although I started trading more than 10 years ago – almost 12 to be exact – my blog and public efforts in trading started in the fall of 2007, almost ten years ago. I was 21 at the time and I viewed trading in a completely different way although my core believes – which is what has kept me trading all this time – have remained basically the same. Today I want to share with you a post about some of the most important things I have learned through the past 10 years of trading, small pieces of wisdom that I hope will help you reach your trading goals faster and make smaller mistakes in the process. Although I still have a lot to learn and a lot to understand I believe these ten years have taught me some key lessons worth sharing.
It’s all about statistics. When I started trading I was in the middle of my major in chemistry. Although I knew how important statistics and math were in science I did not fully appreciate their importance in trading. It has become more and more apparent through time that if you need to pick one area to learn about to become a good trader, it should be statistics. Someone without a strong core knowledge of statistics is most probably going to fail in trading, basically because they can be easily fooled by randomness – have a good month by chance and believe they have it all figured out – and are prone to pick strategies that are mathematically proven to fail (think grids, martingales, etc), just because of the way in which they skew short term rewards in exchange for future catastrophic failure. Statistics are the sharpest tool in the shed, use it.
Automated trading – any trading – is emotional. One of the reasons why I decided to focus so much on automated trading was because I knew that it was very hard for me to trade in a rational manner when I had to make every trading decision by hand. However it quickly became obvious that automated trading is not emotion-free. Algorithms need to be traded and decisions need to be made about whether to run them or not. You need to decide if you run system A or system B and if either of them performs poorly you need to decide whether that’s normal and the system needs to be allowed to recover or whether it needs to be removed. There is no such thing as emotionless trading, because there is no such thing as decision-less trading.
Everything eventually fails, everything. When you begin trading and find something that works pretty consistently you feel like you have the entire problem solved. Through the first half of the last 10 years I developed around 4 systems that performed with amazing consistency for 3-5 years and then, they all failed, almost at the same time. Having systems that have been performing so well suddenly start to get into drawdowns far more prominent than anything within your historical tests – even your Monte Carlo simulations – is a pretty discouraging experience. You feel like the roof is crumbling over your head, with no way to hide. Since everything fails, you need to make sure no piece of your trading arsenal is vital to your trading. Everything fails, so everything needs to have a replacement.
Trading should be boring, it’s not a casino. If you feel a rush of excitement when the market moves in your favor or sick to your stomach when you lose, then you’re definitely risking too much. In the beginning I used to trade with risk levels I would never touch now – haven’t we all? – but I realized that this meant that my decisions about what to trade – which systems to use, etc – became clouded by the emotions that were attached to watching them trade. Watching an algorithm trade shouldn’t generate any sort of strong emotion, if this happens, lower your risk, you’re gambling.
The past is the past. A key insight about trading is that historical profitability is necessary but not sufficient. Even if you manage to eliminate all cognitive and statistical biases when designing a trading system – which you cannot do – a system can still fail under future market conditions. This is basically because there is no rule saying that the future will be equal to the past in all specific ways in which it can. If there are say 100 million potential algorithms that worked in the past that would not be expected to have worked just due to chance or mining bias the market might evolve in a way where 70 million of those are either unprofitable or behave much worse. Trading profitably requires a measurement of these future expectations, there must be some knowledge of how likely things are to develop in a certain way. The past is limited in possibilities while the future is limitless.
Failure to innovate is failure. We’re no longer in the 1970’s trading Donchian channel breakouts, this is a reality. Algorithmic trading systems that are simple tend to have deteriorating long term edges compared to more complicated strategies that work, simply because they are more accessible to people who are searching for inefficiencies. This is why the drawdowns for things like long term trend following systems tend to become worse with time, because they are traded to the point where trading them becomes painful for those willing to operate them. More complexity requires more knowledge for the evaluation of things like statistical biases so there is a much higher entry barrier for more complex trading systems. Complexity causes higher failure when done incorrectly, due to increases in bias sources and things like chances of programming bugs, however well done higher complexity – algorithmic complexity, execution complexity, etc – will tend to have deeper edges, just because of the accessibility problem (or do you think Renaissance trades the turtle system?).
Lacking insights is having a disadvantage. Think about the trading system or systems you are using right now. Could you answer any question about them? Can you answer what the probability of winning or losing is? What is the probability of winning or losing given this week’s market conditions? Last week’s? Can you pin-point what a market condition is and how to define that mathematically? A lack of ability to answer a question means that you’re at a disadvantage against someone who has that answer. Trading – particularly in negative sum game markets like Forex – is a cut-throat, shark tank, last-man-standing competition. Answers are the gold currency here, each answer you lack means a bit less of an edge for you, a bit more for your smarter competitor.
Success is not a website, video, system or book away. It is really tempting to believe that success in trading is easy, but there’s a ton of Dunning-Kruger effect here. Traders who are new and have read a few books or gone through a few seminars/webinars or youtube videos – especially those with a few months of profits under their belts – tend to underestimate the difficulty in trading. I remember when I was 21, I thought that I was a trading wizard after only a few months within the game. It’s perfectly normal to believe that something that you’re doing apparently successfully is “easy” but time eventually shows – as the market cycles and traders are crushed – that trading is a very difficult game indeed. No website – including my blog and trading community – video or book, will ever be enough to make you profitable on their own.
It’s something you don’t do fundamentally for the money. Through the years the people that I have met who are successful traders – either discretionary or algorithmic – sincerely don’t do this fundamentally for the money. Trading just for the money is a huge trap because you won’t have the necessary focus and driving force necessary to develop the understanding needed to succeed but you will be obsessed with things like avoiding all losing trades, over-trading, reaching a certain % target per day/week/month etc. Certainly the money is important but it isn’t the underlying reason why I pursue trading nor why all good traders I know do so. If you don’t love math, difficult challenges and innovation – by the way, it’s not a crime if you don’t – then quantitative trading is probably not a good choice for you.
Programming is vital, learn to do it. Besides building a strong base in statistics, the next corner-stone for any trader should be coding. Programming is not only good to learn if you want to automate algorithms but it is also vital for running experiments to answer questions and apply all your knowledge in statistics. As I mentioned before, the ability to answer questions marks a fundamental difference in someone’s ability to find and profitably trade edges compared to someone who can’t. Programming is a tool to answer these questions and lacking programming knowledge puts a person at an enormous disadvantage against someone with that knowledge. While it took a discretionary trader 2 years to develop a trading system, it might have taken a quant 5 seconds to develop 1000 of those algorithms using data-mining tools. From systematically evaluating sources of bias to properly quantifying and describing market conditions, coding is key. Learning to program will only be a positive thing for you – even if trading doesn’t work for you as it’s a very generic skill – do a few online courses and start coding.
I hope you enjoyed this list. Although I realize some of the above might be controversial for some people, especially new traders, these are some things I have learned through this journey that I thought many of you would like to know about. If you would like to learn more about automated trading and how we approach some of the problems mentioned above please consider joining Asirikuy.com, a website – not a holy grail – filled with educational videos, trading systems, development and a sound, honest and transparent approach towards automated trading.strategies
from Mechanical Forex http://bit.ly/2tDxWtT
It’s no secret that Instagram is full of brunch pics and food porn, but restaurants have noticed the trend. The Verge details how food spots are catering to photo-happy eaters with interior design details, eye-catching spaces and the proper amount of light.
The first trailer for Season 2 of “Westworld” show that the robots are done being Disney-like animatronic figures in the wild, wild west resort. It also shows that the robots are not to be fucked with because they will bypass their programming and kill anyone in their way. The bloody trailer was revealed at San Diego Comic-Con 2017 on Saturday.
Season 2 shows that the Man In Black (Ed Harris), Bernard Lowe (Jeffrey Wright), Dolores Abernathy (Evan Rachel Wood), and Maeve (Thandie Newton) are all ready for hum vs. robot war. The SDCC trailer begins with a blood-soaked player piano, before Bernard looks down at a dead tiger; have we not learned from Cecil’s death? People get shot from behind all while “I Gotta Be Me” by Sammy Davis Jr. plays in the background.
Westworld does not return until 2018, but a specific date has not been announced yet, so this trailer will have to do for now.
When you go wireless, you accept trade-offs. The questions become "Does the connection avoid freaking out all the time?" and "Do they sound that much worse than a normal pair?" Everyone would love a world without wires, and that desire goes a long way, but cords are still reliable little things from a quality perspective.
Because of those technical challenges, very few Bluetooth headphones manage to be polished enough to provide a genuinely delightful experience. But Sennheiser’s HD 1 Wireless are an exception.
They’ve been around for a while now — they used to be called the "Momentum Wireless" — and I am far from the first person to say they’re great. They also cost a whopping $500.
But that high price is really the only thing you could call a "flaw." The HD 1 Wireless aren’t much of a value, but they’re the type of product that just feels pleasant whenever you need them. If you must go wireless, and you simply want the best, they should be near the top of your shortlist. Here’s why:
Let’s start with the design. The Sennheiser HD 1 Wireless are at once stylish and understated. I could see them looking good on both men and women, and I had people of both genders tell me as much, unprompted, while I wore them. They’ve got this retro vibe to them, but don’t lean so hard into it that they feel corny. Looks matter with over-ear headphones, and the HD 1 have the sort of upscale feel you’d want from a $500 product.
The materials here are just nice. There’s little plastic — instead, you get a mix of metal and leather, all of which feels wonderfully smooth to the touch. It’s also sturdy enough to survive a few drops.
Everything is exceptionally comfortable, too. The leather headband is smooth and light, and the soft earpads are both thickly padded and sizable enough to fit over most ears. It’s not overly heavy, and, for me at least, it was spacious enough to keep my ears from getting sweaty. I wore them for hours at a time without issue.
Just don’t expect these things to accompany you to the gym; that’s not the point here, and you should know that just by looking at them.
The controls on the HD 1 Wireless are simple enough. There’s a power/pairing button and a toggle that manages to control volume, play/pause, and track skipping all at once. All of this works fine, though the power button could stand to be a little more pronounced.
On Sunday, legenday US Olympic swimmer Michael Phelps was set to match up with a shark to answer the age old question of who would win in a race between a shark and a human. Unfortunately, Phelps ending up racing against a CGI simulation of a shark and people were fucking pissed because they felt the Discovery channel falsely promoted the event.
Telegram is the latest app to join the many messengers that have mimicked Snapchat’s disappearing message feature.
On Sunday, Telegram started offering disappearing photos and videos in one-to-one chats.
The messaging app built its name by being one of the first to offer end-to-end encryption. Till now, it also had a “secret chat” function, offering self-destructing messages in chats designated to be private.
Secret chats on Telegram are different from regular messages, in that the latter can be synced across devices and between desktops and mobiles. Secret chats, on the other hand, are only hosted on the sender and receiving devices, and don’t remain on Telegram’s cloud.
But now, the new feature means regular chats can self-destruct as well.
According to Telegram’s latest update, all you have to do is set a timer and your selected photos and videos will disappear.
The new update also sees an improved photo editor, and lets users speed up their downloads from large public channels.
Self-destructing messages is not likely to endear Telegram to authorities, which has recently come under fire in several countries because of its hard encryption.