Korg will bring their Gadget music studio to the Nintendo Switch console


KORG have long embraced their Japanese neighbors at Nintendo by bringing music apps to handheld gaming platforms. Now it’s Nintendo Switch’s turn.

With the added power of Switch, spring 2018 promises to give the Nintendo platform the same box of virtual instruments and effects and sequencing tools we’ve come to expect on iOS. So all those drum machines and synths and sound processors and song creation and arrangement features make the leap.

But because Switch is both a handheld and something you can use on your couch with a TV, expect two modes of interaction. In addition to being able to switch between Zelda and music making, you can port that Switch at home and make music on the couch. We’ll have to see how comfortable that is with these gaming-style controllers, but it could make an interesting new alternative to parking in front of Netflix.

A close partnership with a boutique Japanese developer has enabled Korg’s long track record on mobile. Detune Ltd. have brought a lot of KORG’s iOS and gaming titles to life. That includes the KORG DSN-12 and KORG M01D for 3DS (available as digital downloads), and even cartridges for earlier Nintendo cartridges, but also iOS titles like KORG iDS-10 and iMS-20 for iPhone and iPad.

Detune have done a lot of non-KORG titles, as well. And it’s fair to say they’re steeped in game and music culture, having put out gaming soundtracks and app-only compilations made with their own instruments. I’ve met the developers, and they’re avid musicians as well as music geeks. Check them out:


Here’s that tweet:

And a closer look at their first display:

And some video:

Yes, we want it. But oh wow do we ever want this damned t-shirt. FIGHT ON DAW – whatever that means!

Japanese journalists got their hands on it – Japanese only:


4gamer has a lot of photos — here are a couple of especially good ones:

The post Korg will bring their Gadget music studio to the Nintendo Switch console appeared first on CDM Create Digital Music.

from Create Digital Music http://bit.ly/2iPoeA8

If Your Vibrator Is Hacked, Is It a Sex Crime?

Image: Jim Cooke/Gizmodo

On a recent trip to Berlin, Alex Lomas’ acquaintance posed him a challenge: Can you find a Bluetooth-enabled butt plug in the wild, and can you turn it on without its owner’s help? Lomas, a penetration tester with the British cybersecurity firm Pen Test Partners, pulled out his phone, consulted the detection app LightBlue, and quickly identified a Lovense Hush, purportedly “the most powerful vibrating buttplug on the market,” that Lomas says was nestled in the rear end of a stranger. What’s more, that Hush was vulnerable, open to hacking by anyone who knew how.

As the world hurtles toward total app-connectivity, the gap between what our devices could do and what the law can address widens, particularly with teledildonics—or, sex tech that you can control remotely, over the internet. A sex toy hacking situation like the one Lomas identified isn’t likely to occur outside a lab, but linking a vibrator to the internet opens up the possibility that it might, and we should be ready to discuss it.


Lomas published the results of his experiment on the Pen Test Partners blog, and coined the term “screwdriving,” a sexualized play on wardriving (or the drive-by stealing of other people’s wi-fi). In a Skype interview with Gizmodo, he summarized the procedure in layman’s terms: Hush uses Bluetooth Low Energy, basically the more modern version of Bluetooth, to connect with smart devices. If you are wearing the butt plug out in public, and a designated partner is standing within about 30 feet of your tuchus, then that partner can control its vibration speed and pattern discreetly from their phone. Which is all well and good, Lomas said, unless that person wanders out of (admittedly limited) connectivity range. In that case, Hush “will sort of fail open into a discovery mode, ready for other people to discover and then take control,” to pair with the plug—there’s no password protection, or the PIN is an easily guessed 0000 or 1234—and pilot your anal experience, uninvited. (In an email, a Lovense rep explained that this is indeed the case, although the toy does have a function that automatically turns it off if the connected device falls out of range. Lomas pointed out that the customer would have to know that any of this is even possible, which many won’t.)

Lomas did not sync with the Hush and dial up the vibration, but he could have, and therein lies the problem. A consumer could venture out into the world, intending to have a secret erotic experience with one person, but end up having telesex with someone else entirely. But what kind of crime even is that—cyber, sex, or some kind of newfangled hybrid? And is anyone out there equipped to handle it?

The answer seems to lie somewhere in the neighborhood of not really slightly surprising as news of sex toy vulnerability becomes more and more frequent. White hat hackers have already exposed a number of adult companies—Lovense, WeVibe—as unstable repositories for the surprisingly detailed stores of intimate user data they’ve been collecting, mostly unbeknownst to their customers. WeVibe’s data insecurity led to invasion of privacy lawsuits and modest settlements, yet the possibility that random third parties could insert themselves into a mutual masturbation session on Skype or a camming platform like Chaturbate has been less widely discussed. Hush isn’t the only assailable toy: Pretty much any BLE-enabled toy (or indeed device, whether that’s a hearing aid or a smoke detector) could be opened to outside probing. Products connected to apps like Body Chat seem pretty open to outside intervention, while the camera-equipped Siime Eye vibrator is easily hijacked by anyone with the know-how, potentially affording strangers vividly detailed views of your genitalia. That victim would certainly be able to claim invasion of privacy, but a breach of that scale seems more significant.


To be fair, the possibility that an unwanted third party could hack a sex toy is sliver slim: As Lovense explained in its response to Lomas’ experiment and in an email exchange with Gizmodo (of the Internet of Things sex toy makers contacted, Lovense was the only one to respond), Hush can only connect to one device at a time, and screwdriving would require sophisticated knowledge of BLE and “Lovense protocol,” along with “BLE sniffing hardware” most people don’t have. Even if someone did manage to pounce on your butt plug’s lapsed BLE connection, they’d need to be extremely close: within 30 feet and “a clear line of sight,” so, probably following you around. But it’s possible to buy long-range Bluetooth transmitters and receivers, and Lomas reported that a number of readers tweeted at him post-publication to say they’d successfully located their neighbors’ toys through a shared wall.

Lomas acknowledged that some Hush buyers may be into a stranger’s surreptitious involvement, and that’s perfectly fine; the problem, as he sees it, is that the average consumer probably won’t realize they’ve consented to a semi-private experience—that they are, “essentially, walking around with a giant butt plug transmitter” broadcasting out their anuses, or inadvertently offering a telescopic tour inside their vaginas.

Indeed, in considering teledildonic hacks from a legal perspective, consent should be a big part of the equation: instinctually, a stranger surprising you with genital vibrations reads as a violation. Legally, sexual assault doesn’t require penetration, merely “sexual contact or behavior that occurs without the explicit consent of the recipient.” According to Shanlon Wu, a defense lawyer in Washington D.C. and a former federal sex crimes prosecutor, the absence of consent like what would result from a remotely controlled, hacked sex toy signals sex assault.


“The typical definition of a felony-type sexual abuse is an unconsented-to penetration,” whether it’s with a body part or an object, Wu said. As regards the latter, he doesn’t see the legal equation changing if it’s a hand or a device controlling the object’s movement. Wu acknowledged that some lawyers might get bogged down in the virtual aspect of the offense, and view wearing a teledildonic device as blanket consent to its use. But consent is not transferrable, he said.

Wu offered an analogy: “If I’m entering a boxing match … I’m consenting, obviously, to the contest with my opponent. If he hits me, I can’t be yelling, ‘Oh, he assaulted me, he punched me!’ because we’re consenting to punching each other. But if his corner man, his manager, comes out and clocks me in the head during the match, they can’t argue, ‘You consented to a boxing match, so anybody gets to beat up on you.’” Similarly, if you consent to someone using a sex toy on you, that’s not an invitation for any passerby to join in.

“Consent is consent whether it’s in person or whether it’s remote, and I think that’s the thing to focus on,” Wu said. He sees this form of cyberstealthing as a straightforward sexual assault prosecution, but Stewart Baker—a partner at the law firm Steptoe & Johnson where his practice covers cyberlaw and technology-related issues—disagreed.


“I’m having trouble fitting this neatly into a sex crime framework,” Baker told Gizmodo. “If somebody breaks into your dildo, they’re criminally responsible,” he said, but the question is how.

While Baker agreed that vibrator hijacking skewed the concept of consent, he also speculated that trying it as a sex crime could raise complicating questions about agreed-upon partner participation. If the sex toy in question comes with a built-in camera, that could implicate its owner in ways that won’t sit well with many people: Baker noted that consensual sexting between teens has already translated to several child pornography prosecutions, and if two minors are using a camera-equipped vibrator with one another on Skype or any other internet-connected video platform, they could inadvertently land themselves in a similar world of legal hurt. The clearest path forward Baker sees is prosecuting screwdriving as a cyber crime, under the 1986 Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, which encompasses all wittingly unauthorized access of a computer as well as the filching of its contents. While it does not specifically address teledildonics, the CFAA arguably offers a means of placing consent in a cyber context.

“The difference between being authorized and having consent is vanishingly small,” Baker said, “and so if you don’t have authority to do something with somebody else’s dildo, then if you’re doing it remotely over the internet, you’ve committed a crime that could turn out to be a felony [under the CFAA].”


Who’s likely not liable, though? The manufacturers, unless they’ve somehow misrepresented the product, Baker said. (The Lovense rep with whom Gizmodo spoke said they would broach the idea of adding a clarifying label to product packaging with the CEO.) While civil suits have resulted from toymakers’ insecure data collection methods, when it comes to a telesex hack, the only person responsible is the hacker. Which means it’s reasonable to request that both the manufacturers and the law figure out how to address sex toy vulnerabilities.

For both Wu and Baker, screwdriving cases remain relegated to the realm of the hypothetical and some disagreement on prosecuting such a crime likely stems from a lack of precedent. A CFAA violation and a sexual assault are both felony crimes, though, and their possible sentences vary widely. Arguably more important are the implications of treating a sex toy hijacking as a computer-related crime, rather than a crime against a person. Doing so risks minimizing an offense that ultimately hinges on unasked-for intimate contact, and a lawyer who argues that wearing a device like Hush in public is opening themselves to its unauthorized use is victim blaming.

The legal approach to screwdriving, though, would likely depend on whatever real life victims materialize, and as sex tech veers increasingly toward IoT connectivity—syncing with an app, virtual reality masturbation sessions, setting off a cross-country partner’s vibrator—without manufacturers pausing to patch security holes, it seems reasonable to expect they will. And while it’s probably not time to agonize over whether or not a hacker is waiting in the wings of your Skype sex session, ready to hijack your vibrator at any moment, it might be time to start thinking about what the future of sex crimes looks like. Better now than after we’ve arrived.

from Lifehacker http://bit.ly/2h0fuqc

This ‘Distracted Boyfriend’ Meme Halloween Costume Deserves A Special Award For Greatness


distracted boyfriend meme halloween costume


One of the most fun and memorable memes of 2017 has to be the comical “distracted boyfriend” meme.

What began as just someone just laughing at a stock photo of a man checking out another women while walking with his girlfriend turned into one of the biggest viral sensations of the year.

If you somehow are not familiar with it, (a) where have you been? And (b) here are a few solid examples…

Instagram Photo

Instagram Photo

Instagram Photo

And, naturally…

Instagram Photo

Got it? Good stuff, right?

Well, it just got better because a genius named Chase Mitchell decided that the “distracted boyfriend” meme would make for one hell of a Halloween costume. And you know what? He was 100% correct.

That…is amazingly well-executed right there.

Of course, his tweeps absolutely loved it…

Some even submitted their own versions…

Well done by one and all.

H/T Time

from BroBible.com http://bit.ly/2xEIEyc

Octopuses Don’t Have Tentacles, and Other Facts Scientists Want You to Know

Photo by florathexplora.

Entomology student Dalton Ludwick asked science Twitter: If you could have the entire world know something about your field of study, what would it be? The hashtag #MyOneScienceTweet was born, and it is glorious.

Birds are dinosaurs, but pterosaurs aren’t. Mind blown, right? Here’s the one about octopuses:

There are important science facts about people, too:

And physics:

And everything else:

For more excellent science facts you should stash away in your brain right this instant, visit #MyOneScienceTweet on twitter. You’re welcome.

from Lifehacker http://bit.ly/2z172Ow

Stranger Things Season Two Is Still Full Of Great Cars With One Notable Mistake


Last year, we reveled in the ‘80s-tastic nostalgia-porn of Stranger Things, and, predictable bastard I am, wrote about all of the period cars used in the series. Season two was released last Friday, and over the weekend sweet, loyal Jalopnik readers were already all over my ass to do this again for the new series. Okay, okay, already! Here you go!

A few parameters here before we dive in: first, I’m not going to focus on the main character-cars we already saw in the last season, because, well, we covered those. Second, I, of course, didn’t document every car that shows up on screen, just a bunch of obvious or interesting ones, so if I missed one, sorry, and if my missing that car angered you, I do hope you come to terms with your demons.


Finally, since I know not everyone put on two pairs of Depends and binge-watched the whole series in a kiddie pool full of Little Debbies and corn dogs, I’ll do my best to minimize any blatant spoilers. It may not be perfect, but I’ll try, and either way, you’ve been warned.

Okay! Let’s look at a bunch of cars like the obsessive dweebs we are!

This is a nice start to things: not only do we get a clear date to know when everything is supposed to be happening, but that’s a nice 1966 Plymouth Belvedere station wagon, there. I think it’s a ‘66, but I could be off a bit.


My real question is that I’m wondering if this could be the same ‘66 or ‘67 Belvedere wagon we saw in the other Netflix period-car-crammed show, Mindhunter?

A pretty sweet mobile-lounge Chevy Van, I think likely 1978 or so. I think it has to be a ‘78 or later because it has the rectangular sealed-beam lights.

Speaking of rectangular sealed-beam lights, we come to the biggest, most obvious (to a car dork) anachronism seen in the show. These Chevrolet Caprice cop cars make sense for the era, but a number of the ones shown, like the one above, have the wide rectangular headlights that replaced the quad rectangular sealed-beam setup in 1987.

These cop cars, therefore, are from three years in the future!

Here, at Hawkins’ own corrugated-metal arcade, we see a nice selection of early-mid ‘80s cars, including an ‘83 or so Honda Civic Wagon with some very dark tinted windows.

This mostly shows Joyce Byers’ Ford Pinto, which we covered last time, but I wanted to point out a relatively unloved ‘80s staple: the band-aid-colored 1984 or so Toyota-built Chevy Nova sedan. Nobody is really restoring these Novas today.

Not car-related but did Dig-Dug actually allow for more than three-character high score names? I’m skeptical it did. I’ll have to fire up MAME in a bit and check.

There’s an MG Midget in the background there; last season, the only MG we saw was in a junkyard, so I’m happy to see one alive and well this time around.

This is perhaps the most notable and best-cast car of the new season: a Chevrolet Camaro, somewhere between 1978 and 1981. Those body colored urethane bumpers are the giveaway here, though I’m not exactly sure which specific year in that range this one is. I bet one of our commenters will know.


This is the new bad kid’s car, and he tears ass in it all over the place, roaring mightily and with some serious bravado. That bravado becomes sort of hilarious in modern contexts when you realize that it’s possible (and likely) this thing was making a sub-Kia Rio 120 horsepower from its massive 4.4-liter V8.

Here’s a well-populated parking lot shot showing a nice ‘73 (I think) Karmann-Ghia, what seems to be a ‘72 Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme convertible, and a 1966 or so Ford Mustang.

That blue-and-white Vanagon was seen in the background of the show last season, and there’s also a nice Wagoneer, Pinto Wagon there. (I forgot to mention that teal ‘67 Chevelle, or that tip of a ‘79 or so Olds Cutlass peeking out from the right side there)

Hey look! The first French car we’ve seen in the show, as far as I know! It’s a Peugeot 505, maybe an ‘82 or so. In front is a big, brown ‘83 or so Cadillac Sedan DeVille

I like this one: next to Hopper’s police Chevy Blazer is an ‘84-ish Toyota Van, the mid-engined predecessor of the Previa. This is the car of an investigative reporter, and I think a pretty good choice for the character.

Here we have a boring gray Chevy Celebrity, and something I think is a Ford product but I can’t quite figure out. Those taillights are throwing me. One of you knows.

(UPDATE: It’s an Impala! A ‘67.)

This pumpkin farm truck seems to be a mid-’60s Ford F100. I always liked the white-painted trim.

Ah, a classic ‘80s movie cop car, the nearly always doomed Dodge Diplomat.

Is there any better place to eat lunch than in front of a roast-beef-brown 1975 Mercury Monarch? Of course not.

An average parking lot in the 1980s usually had a pretty good range of car ages, as we see here: a Ford Thunderbird from 1963, a Datsun 300ZX from 20 years later, and a Toyota Corolla that I think is a couple of years too new—it looks like an ‘86, based on the headlights. I think.

I wonder who made this truck? I bet Kenworth? Wait, no, I know that grille pattern—it’s a Mack. Yeah, look at that lovely Mack big rig!

This is one of the better-cast cars in the series. Bob seems like the sort of guy who would do a lot of careful research and then buy a new, terra-cotta colored 1984 Toyota Camry Liftback.


I think—and I can’t be absolutely certain, but I have a hunch—that I found the actual car used here. I bet it’s this one that was featured on Barn Finds earlier this year. I mean, how many of these things, in that color, in that good condition, can be left? Not many.

We talked about Steve’s 1981 BMW 733i last time, but I just wanted to point out one detail that’s sort of a giveaway that the car is more than just a few years old: that faded front marker light. It usually takes a solid decade of sun at least to get one that butter-colored from the original cheddar cheese-color.

In a flashback scene, we get a good look at the interior of a 1958 VW Beetle. I’m pretty sure it’s a ‘58 because it has the newer dashboard but the old ‘batwing’ steering wheel.

This is just a tiny background detail car, but there goes a ‘77 or ‘78 Volkswagen Westfalia camper, there, behind the bus.

Look! A nice blue Volvo Amazon! The way that cop is blocking it it’s easy to imagine it as a long-hooded two-seat GT car, which would be pretty amazing.

The first Porsche we’ve seen, a 924 (actually, it seems to be a 944—the big marker light should have told me) waiting at the light next to a 1964 Oldsmobile Dynamic 88. That one took me a while to figure out.

A yellow Ford Fairlmont without taxi markings? Weird.

Somebody’s AMC Gremlin needs some real help.

This is such a period truck and color scheme—a ketchup-and-dijon-mustard-colored 1972 GMC Sierra Grande pickup truck.

I’m just including this shot of that Jonathan’s ‘72 Ford LTD because it’s an ideal example of something people almost never do in the real world—leave their car with all its lights on, with no worry about dead batteries or anything.

Okay, this isn’t car-related, but I wanted to point out that in the somewhat ridiculous hacking scene that involved the popular BASIC programming language, someone took at least some time to put real-ish BASIC code in here.


No one in the ‘80s would have formatted the lines that way, but the code sort of checks out, with four nested FOR…NEXT loops to go through the digits 0 through 9, and some conditional checking against some very non-BASIC made up crap.

Still, some effort was put in here, so good job, somebody.

One of the few Mercedes-Benzes we’ve seen, and it’s a 1974 or ‘75 W115 coupé! The kind with no B-pillar—I always liked these.

Let’s end with a little bit of a game: can you find the 1973 Volkswagen Beetle in the Upside-Down? It’s right there, parked in a parallel universe of terror and whatever!


I think the first season may have been a bit stronger overall, but I enjoyed season two, and the car-casting game was as good as ever, which is really about half of why I watch anything on television at all, if I’m honest.

from Gizmodo http://bit.ly/2gYI6Ap

Peer-To-Peer Trading Exchange Disrupts The Financial Status Quo


Next generation financial institution based on blockchain technology and peer to peer trading exchange trade.io plans to disrupt the existing financial status quo.

trade.io democratizes the markets and saves money for investors and companies through reducing and eliminating the tremendous fees and inefficiencies by utilizing its innovative blockchain trading platform. The trade.io exchange not only supports trading of multiple asset classes, but a more efficient listing of assets in the crypto economy under the indelible & trusted history that the blockchain provides.

trade.io is introducing its pioneering peer-to-peer trading platform, where participants can share in the profits of the exchange. trade.io P2P participants will be able to purchase TradeTokens or “TIO” through their e-wallet or in our upcoming utility token ICO to participate in the forthcoming liquidity pool and potentially receive pro-rata daily disbursements of up to 50% of the pool’s profits based on performance. This P2P shared liquidity pool, in which participants share in the pool’s performance will be innovative and unique to the industry. Ultimately, the transactional records of the liquidity pool participation will be blockchain based as well.

Jim Preissler, CEO of trade.io stated “this is not just about distributed technology… it’s about distributed wealth through our peer-to-peer shared liquidity pool. We intend to seed the liquidity pool with approximately $50 million cash, as well as 50 million TradeTokens. All participants will share 50/50 from our seed contribution as well. The time has come where people take back control of capital markets and reject the status quo.”

Ultimately, trade.io will be a trading platform for not only crypto assets but also Forex and CFD’s over precious metals, oils, commodities, index’s and global equities and any number of potential assets.

The company is now offering up to 275 million TradeTokens, which are available to purchase via pre-ICO from 7 November 2017 to 21 November 2017, with the ICO occurring 22 November 2017 to 29 November 2017.

The post Peer-To-Peer Trading Exchange Disrupts The Financial Status Quo appeared first on tradersdna – resources for traders/investors for Forex, Stocks, Commodities, Bitcoin, Blockchain, Fintech and Forum.

from tradersdna – resources for traders/investors for Forex, Stocks, Commodities, Bitcoin, Blockchain, Fintech and Forum http://bit.ly/2gYOMOI

‘Super Mario Odyssey’ is selling even faster than ‘Zelda’


The Nintendo Switch has been a massive hit since its launch in March, selling more than seven million units worldwide so far, putting it on track to beat Wii U lifetime sales in just a year. But these aren’t the only numbers Nintendo gets to flaunt. According to its financial briefing released today, the company estimates sales of Super Mario Odyssey have exceeded two million units in just three days. In other words, since it hit the shelves, the game has sold at a rate of 463 copies a minute (or eight per second).

This is impressive (Zelda: Breath of the Wild took around a month to shift 2.7m units) and marks Nintendo’s biggest launch ever for a Switch title, beating all Wii U game launches. According to UK-based Chart-Track, the game’s release has also inspired a 64% increase in Switch console sales.

In its briefing, the company said it plans to make more Switch systems available, and would like to see Super Mario Odyssey become "an evergreen title" beyond the initial launch excitement. With the holidays fast approaching, Nintendo will no doubt be levelling up on the back of this one for some time to come.

Via: Neowin

Source: Nintendo

from Engadget http://engt.co/2zTB6IV