Advertise here
Advertise here

again

now browsing by tag

 
 

Cochran’s health raises national speculation again as tax vote nears

CLOSE

Sen. Thad Cochran speaks at block part sponsored by All Citizens for Mississippi PAC in downtown Jackson. By Geoff Pender

As a key vote on the GOP tax plan nears, Sen. Thad Cochran’s health is again in the national spotlight, along with that of Arizona Sen. John McCain.

With a narrow GOP margin in the Senate about to become even narrower after Alabama voters elected Democrat Doug Jones this week, Republicans are trying to pass the tax plan as early as Monday. The loss of any GOP votes threatens passage of the tax bill. Cochran and McCain have missed votes this week, but none appeared close or crucial.

A Cochran spokesman on Thursday said the Senate Appropriations chairman had outpatient surgery on Monday to remove a non-melanoma lesion on his nose, and “the procedure was more extensive than expected.”

“But the senator is doing well and available now for votes if needed,” spokesman Chris Gallegos said. “Senator Cochran is in Washington and expects to vote for the tax plan when it comes to the Senate next week.”

More: How sick is Sen. Thad Cochran?

McCain, who announced this summer he had brain cancer, was hospitalized this week for side effects from his treatment, his office said. His office said he plans to return soon, although it did not give a specific time frame.

Cochran, 80, has faced questions about his health since his 2014 re-election bid and near-loss to state Sen. Chris McDaniel, when Cochran was frequently absent from his own campaign. His extended absence from Congress from mid-September through mid-October this year brought renewed questions as to whether the senior senator from Mississippi and chairman of Appropriations is healthy enough to continue to serve.

Cochran Chief of Staff Brad White on Thursday said Cochran has been “engaged with his office, taking meetings, working on the omnibus bill.”

More: Who would Bryant appoint to U.S. Senate if Cochran resigns?

“He fully intends to be there next week for the tax bill and all the others coming up and he plans to continue work on into next year on the budget and appropriations bills,” White said.

Cochran himself seldom fields such questions or meets in person with media and has instead relied largely on spokespeople for several years.

Cochran’s health has also raised renewed questions of whether he might step down as Appropriations chairman, and Sen. Richard Shelby of Alabama, the second-ranking Republican on the committee take over.

Shelby’s office on Thursday issued the following statement: “No. Sen. Thad Cochran is the chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee until the end of 2018, when he is required to step down from the position due to the Republican term limit rule for committee chairs.”

Clarion Ledger Washington Bureau writer Deborah Barfield Berry contributed to this report.

Subscribe: Check out our special subscription offers

 

The Internet Is Free Again

Disney’s deal announced Thursday to buy some premium 21st Century Fox properties for $52.4 billion underscores how technology is remaking the media landscape. This discomfits some, but the Federal Communications Commission is right to let markets steer competition and innovation.

The FCC on Thursday voted 3-2 to approve chairman Ajit Pai’s plan to repeal “net neutrality” rules backed by the Obama Administration that reclassified internet-service providers as common carriers under Title II of the Communications Act of 1934….

Next Windows 10 update to make scrolling great again in Microsoft Edge browser

2deb2_Microsoft-Edge-2 Next Windows 10 update to make scrolling great again in Microsoft Edge browser

Microsoft has announced that the company will finally address an annoying bug in Windows 10’s default web browser. Microsoft posted a blog to confirm that the Edge browser has a “Scroll Jank’ bug and the fix is coming soon with the next Windows 10 update, while it will be fixed in the upcoming Windows 10 preview build.

Scroll jank is a bug where the frames take too long for a browser to respond when there is scrolling or animations on the screen. Microsoft Edge will soon offer a jank free scrolling experience with the next Windows 10 update, codenamed Redstone 4.

Back in 2016, Microsoft in a support page admitted that Edge has a bug where “it does not fire wheel events when scrolling using the 2-finger scroll gesture on a Precision Touchpad”.

The company has now revealed that Microsoft Edge 17 will support Precision Touch Pad (PTP) Pointer Events this will fire Pointer Events with a pointerType of ‘touch’ in response to PTP gestures.

“Microsoft Edge also utilizes PTPs to enable back/forward swipe and to enhance users’ scrolling experience via off-thread (aka independent) scrolling. Since PTP input is processed differently by the input stack in Windows 10, we wanted to ensure that we took advantage of this and that we gave users a scrolling experience that felt as natural as their experience with touchscreens everywhere on the web. However, the web has traditionally had a bit of a design flaw when it comes to scrolling, in the form of scroll jank — that ‘glitchy’ feeling that the page is stuck, and not keeping up with your finger while you’re scrolling,” Microsoft Program Manager, Scott Low explains the bug in a blog post.

Microsoft will address the Edge browser’s Scroll Jank bug with the next Windows 10 release, codenamed Redstone 4. You will be able to try out PTP Pointer Events in Microsoft Edge starting with next Windows Insider release, on any site, Bing Maps, for example.


Microsoft People app on Windows 10 is once again having sync problems

7eb6b_Microsoft-People-for-Windows-10-Mobile Microsoft People app on Windows 10 is once again having sync problems
Image Courtesy: PocketNow.com.

Microsoft has given up on Windows 10 Mobile platform but they are committed to patching operating system with security updates and fixes till 2019. On October 28, a small group of users reported that Microsoft People app is having sync problems on Windows 10 Mobile. The problem was with non-insider builds too. The bug caused the disappearance of contacts in Windows 10 Mobile’s People app.

Microsoft addressed the issue a few days later with a small update, but the issue has arrived yet again. The server-side bug is only affecting the Windows 10 Mobile devices as the People app continues to function properly in Windows 10 PCs with same Microsoft account.

Many users including the Insiders are complaining that they are having a sync problem again with the People app. Microsoft hasn’t acknowledged the problem yet, although it seems a fairly widespread issue.

There is a fix available but it is not working for all users. To fix the bug, you can sync the contacts in Microsoft People app. It’s worth noting that resetting the Windows Phone handset won’t address this issue.

Since Microsoft has already confirmed that Windows Phone’s feature and hardware is no longer the company’s focus, and as they don’t give Windows Phone users any priority these days, don’t expect a fix anytime soon. You can, however, report this bug on the Feedback Hub and let the team know about the ongoing issues.


CBC, media producers, actors call for internet and Netflix tax — again

The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, media producers and actors are once more calling for a tax on internet service providers and online streaming services like Netflix Inc. to fund Canadian content despite the Liberals’ insistence the federal government will do no such thing.

In submissions to the federal broadcast regulator, the CBC, the Canadian Media Producers Association and the Alliance of Canadian Cinema, Television and Radio Artists argued internet providers should contribute financially to the broadcasting system given Canadians are increasingly ditching cable packages to watch video online. The CBC also argued that internet providers should favour Canadian content – a tactic that could undermine net neutrality.

The submissions are part of the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission’s consultations on future programming distribution models. Heritage Minister Mélanie Joly ordered it to report on potential models by June 2018.

Canadians may have assumed the issues of internet taxes and future content consumption models were closed with the Creative Canada strategy, which Joly released in September after more than a year of consultations on how to support Canadian content in the digital era.

But the strategy didn’t contain specifics on how Canadian content will be funded. Instead, Joly asked the CRTC to hammer out the details.

Under existing legislation, broadcasters must contribute a percentage of revenue to fund Canadian programming. The funds have declined as TV revenues stagnate. Netflix and other video streaming services were explicitly excluded from this regime with a digital media exemption in 1999.

Joly has repeatedly stated the government will not tax internet service providers to fund content, citing the need for affordable access. Nor does it plan to tax Netflix, which currently does not collect and remit sales taxes.

Joly did, however, ink a deal with Netflix to invest $500 million in production in Canada over the next five years. Some saw this as a boon for producers, but others were wary since Netflix does not have to follow the same strict Canadian content requirements that local broadcasters.

Creative groups want to get rid of different treatment for online content. Their submissions called for legislative change so internet providers and video streaming services must pay into the system outlined by the Broadcasting Act.

Submissions from all parties, including the country’s largest internet, TV and wireless service providers, agreed Canadians will increasingly use the internet to watch video and listen to music. No one disputes the internet is here to stay.

But fragmentation in new media has strained traditional business models of advertising and subscriptions, CBC submitted. At a minimum, it said the new rules should require streaming services, wireless carriers and internet providers to contribute to Canadian content like traditional cable and satellite players.

“This is essential to ensure a level playing field among domestic players and between domestic and foreign players,” CBC wrote.

It also proposed regulations to require service providers to enhance the visibility of Canadian programming, a proposal that could flout net neutrality principles that all content should be treated equally. Finally, it repeated a call for additional annual funding of $400 million in order to go ad free.

ACTRA, which represents 23,000 performers, noted that Canada’s film and TV industry is thriving despite the challenges. But it wants internet providers to contribute financially to Canadian content. Approximately two thirds of fixed internet traffic at peak times is used to watch video, according to the CRTC.

ACTRA also asked that online streaming services such as Netflix be required to pay GST or HST (Quebec is already taking steps to require this) and contribute 5 per cent of their gross revenue to Canadian content production.

In its submission to the CRTC, Netflix argued that regulating new media like legacy broadcasters won’t work. Content quotas don’t make sense since consumers choose what they want to watch, and foreign financing is already one of the top two sources of cash for English-language TV production, it said.

Consumer groups, academics and internet providers do not support an internet tax, but many believe Netflix should pay sales taxes like their Canadian counterparts.

ejackson@nationalpost.com

Oracle and Google are back in court over Android, again – Business …

  • Oracle on Thursday will try, once again, to get the courts to tell Google to hand over a lot of money.
  • In May 2016, a jury ruled in favor of Google, saying Google’s use of bits of Oracle code in Android constituted “fair use.”
  • Oracle appealed the verdict, however, and the first appeal hearing is scheduled to kick off Thursday.
  • The two have been duking it out in court for years, but so far, Oracle has not been awarded the multi-billion dollar judgment it’s seeking.

Last May, Oracle suffered a well-publicized loss in its years-long lawsuit against Google over Android. Oracle appealed the verdict and the first hearing is scheduled for Thursday.

The trial was watched closely by the computer industry and included testimony from a who’s who in Silicon Valley, including Alphabet CEO Larry Page, Alphabet chairman Eric Schmidt, and Oracle CEO Safra Catz. At once point Oracle’s Larry Ellison even called Page “evil” over the situation.

While each side has won various stages of the legal fight, the upshot is: Google has yet to be told it is on the hook to pay Oracle for Java, much less the massive, multi-billion dollar fine Oracle has been hoping for.

If the appeals court upholds the last jury verdict, which found in favor of Google, that would likely severely hamper Oracle’s attempts to keep going on this case. Google had attempted to get the Supreme Court to jump into the case in 2015 and issue a definitive ruling, but the Supreme Court declined to do so at that time, leaving it to wind its way through the lower courts first.

The trial was so technical that the judge overseeing the trial, Judge William Alsup of the northern district of California, taught himself to code just to understand the case better, The Verge reported at the time.

Oracle and Google have been battling it out for years in two separate court cases over whether Google must pay Oracle billions of dollars for bits of code copied from Java (a programming language Oracle owns) and used in Android (the language Google controls).

At issue were parts of the code called application programming interfaces (APIs), the technology that allows different computer programs to talk to each other. In May 2016, a jury ruled that Google’s use of the disputed code was “fair use.”

These lawsuits caused a lot of hand-wringing in the software industry, with pro-Google sides worrying that if Oracle won the suit, it would be awful for the software industry. Those folks worried that an Oracle win would make APIs the subject of more lawsuits and make APIs more difficult to create and share.

For those in search of more details on Oracle’s potential next moves, a policy blog from the Computer Communications Industry Association called The Project-Disco blog has posted an interesting analysis of the case.

Both Oracle and Google declined comment.

Snap, Google, Facebook again dominate list of top iPhone apps

South African retail conglomerate Steinhoff, which owns the U.S.-based MattressFirm, announced Wednesday that CEO Markus Jooste had tendered his resignation from the company after the board learned of information relating to “accounting irregularities requiring further investigation.” Steinhoff is the world’s second-largest furniture dealer with operations in Europe, Africa, Australia, and the U.S.

Why it matters: The company’s stock fell more than 60% during trading Wednesday in Frankfurt, where the stock is listed. “This story has the smell of Enron, which rocked financial markets, starting in 2000,” Writes Raymond James analyst Budd Bugatch in a note to clients Wendesday. “It is too soon, obviously, to know the ultimate impact of this mess.”

Oracle is trying to get Google to pay it a lot of money for Android, again

  • Oracle on Thursday will try, once again, to get the courts to tell Google to hand over a lot of money.
  • In May 2016, a jury ruled in favor of Google, saying Google’s use of bits of Oracle code in Android constituted “fair use.”
  • Oracle appealed the verdict, however, and the first appeal hearing is scheduled to kick off Thursday.
  • The two have been duking it out in court for years, but so far, Oracle has not been awarded the multi-billion dollar judgment it’s seeking.

Last May, Oracle suffered a well-publicized loss in its years-long lawsuit against Google over Android. Oracle appealed the verdict and the first hearing is scheduled for Thursday.

The trial was watched closely by the computer industry and included testimony from a who’s who in Silicon Valley, including Alphabet CEO Larry Page, Alphabet chairman Eric Schmidt, and Oracle CEO Safra Catz. At once point Oracle’s Larry Ellison even called Page “evil” over the situation.

While each side has won various stages of the legal fight, the upshot is: Google has yet to be told it is on the hook to pay Oracle for Java, much less the massive, multi-billion dollar fine Oracle has been hoping for.

If the appeals court upholds the last jury verdict, which found in favor of Google, that would likely severely hamper Oracle’s attempts to keep going on this case. Google had attempted to get the Supreme Court to jump into the case in 2015 and issue a definitive ruling, but the Supreme Court declined to do so at that time, leaving it to wind its way through the lower courts first.

The trial was so technical that the judge overseeing the trial, Judge William Alsup of the northern district of California, taught himself to code just to understand the case better, The Verge reported at the time.

Oracle and Google have been battling it out for years in two separate court cases over whether Google must pay Oracle billions of dollars for bits of code copied from Java (a programming language Oracle owns) and used in Android (the language Google controls).

At issue were parts of the code called application programming interfaces (APIs), the technology that allows different computer programs to talk to each other. In May 2016, a jury ruled that Google’s use of the disputed code was “fair use.”

These lawsuits caused a lot of hand-wringing in the software industry, with pro-Google sides worrying that if Oracle won the suit, it would be awful for the software industry. Those folks worried that an Oracle win would make APIs the subject of more lawsuits and make APIs more difficult to create and share.

For those in search of more details on Oracle’s potential next moves, a policy blog from the Computer Communications Industry Association called The Project-Disco blog has posted an interesting analysis of the case.

Both Oracle and Google declined comment.

Oracle is trying to get Google to pay it a lot of money for Android, again

  • Oracle on Thursday will try, once again, to get the courts to tell Google to hand over a lot of money.
  • In May 2016, a jury ruled in favor of Google, saying Google’s use of bits of Oracle code in Android constituted “fair use.”
  • Oracle appealed the verdict, however, and the first appeal hearing is scheduled to kick off Thursday.
  • The two have been duking it out in court for years, but so far, Oracle has not been awarded the multi-billion dollar judgment it’s seeking.

Last May, Oracle suffered a well-publicized loss in its years-long lawsuit against Google over Android. Oracle appealed the verdict and the first hearing is scheduled for Thursday.

The trial was watched closely by the computer industry and included testimony from a who’s who in Silicon Valley, including Alphabet CEO Larry Page, Alphabet chairman Eric Schmidt, and Oracle CEO Safra Catz. At once point Oracle’s Larry Ellison even called Page “evil” over the situation.

While each side has won various stages of the legal fight, the upshot is: Google has yet to be told it is on the hook to pay Oracle for Java, much less the massive, multi-billion dollar fine Oracle has been hoping for.

If the appeals court upholds the last jury verdict, which found in favor of Google, that would likely severely hamper Oracle’s attempts to keep going on this case. Google had attempted to get the Supreme Court to jump into the case in 2015 and issue a definitive ruling, but the Supreme Court declined to do so at that time, leaving it to wind its way through the lower courts first.

The trial was so technical that the judge overseeing the trial, Judge William Alsup of the northern district of California, taught himself to code just to understand the case better, The Verge reported at the time.

Oracle and Google have been battling it out for years in two separate court cases over whether Google must pay Oracle billions of dollars for bits of code copied from Java (a programming language Oracle owns) and used in Android (the language Google controls).

At issue were parts of the code called application programming interfaces (APIs), the technology that allows different computer programs to talk to each other. In May 2016, a jury ruled that Google’s use of the disputed code was “fair use.”

These lawsuits caused a lot of hand-wringing in the software industry, with pro-Google sides worrying that if Oracle won the suit, it would be awful for the software industry. Those folks worried that an Oracle win would make APIs the subject of more lawsuits and make APIs more difficult to create and share.

For those in search of more details on Oracle’s potential next moves, a policy blog from the Computer Communications Industry Association called The Project-Disco blog has posted an interesting analysis of the case.

Both Oracle and Google declined comment.

Oracle is trying to get Google to pay it a lot of money for Android, again

  • Oracle on Thursday will try, once again, to get the courts to tell Google to hand over a lot of money.
  • In May 2016, a jury ruled in favor of Google, saying Google’s use of bits of Oracle code in Android constituted “fair use.”
  • Oracle appealed the verdict, however, and the first appeal hearing is scheduled to kick off Thursday.
  • The two have been duking it out in court for years, but so far, Oracle has not been awarded the multi-billion dollar judgment it’s seeking.

Last May, Oracle suffered a well-publicized loss in its years-long lawsuit against Google over Android. Oracle appealed the verdict and the first hearing is scheduled for Thursday.

The trial was watched closely by the computer industry and included testimony from a who’s who in Silicon Valley, including Alphabet CEO Larry Page, Alphabet chairman Eric Schmidt, and Oracle CEO Safra Catz. At once point Oracle’s Larry Ellison even called Page “evil” over the situation.

While each side has won various stages of the legal fight, the upshot is: Google has yet to be told it is on the hook to pay Oracle for Java, much less the massive, multi-billion dollar fine Oracle has been hoping for.

If the appeals court upholds the last jury verdict, which found in favor of Google, that would likely severely hamper Oracle’s attempts to keep going on this case. Google had attempted to get the Supreme Court to jump into the case in 2015 and issue a definitive ruling, but the Supreme Court declined to do so at that time, leaving it to wind its way through the lower courts first.

The trial was so technical that the judge overseeing the trial, Judge William Alsup of the northern district of California, taught himself to code just to understand the case better, The Verge reported at the time.

Oracle and Google have been battling it out for years in two separate court cases over whether Google must pay Oracle billions of dollars for bits of code copied from Java (a programming language Oracle owns) and used in Android (the language Google controls).

At issue were parts of the code called application programming interfaces (APIs), the technology that allows different computer programs to talk to each other. In May 2016, a jury ruled that Google’s use of the disputed code was “fair use.”

These lawsuits caused a lot of hand-wringing in the software industry, with pro-Google sides worrying that if Oracle won the suit, it would be awful for the software industry. Those folks worried that an Oracle win would make APIs the subject of more lawsuits and make APIs more difficult to create and share.

For those in search of more details on Oracle’s potential next moves, a policy blog from the Computer Communications Industry Association called The Project-Disco blog has posted an interesting analysis of the case.

Both Oracle and Google declined comment.

From the graaaaaave! WileyFox’s Windows 10 phone delayed again …

WileyFox’s Windows 10 Mobile – yes, you read that correctly – has been delayed again, and will now bump into Santa doing his rounds early.

The catchily named “Wileyfox Pro with Windows 10” phone was announced in August, and WileyFox is sure that it can profit from Microsoft’s neglect of its Windows phone customers. Over at the main sales channel for the device, Amazon UK, it’s now due on “December 18”.

The Pro is a low-end (Snapdragon 210, 16GB/2GB, 8MP main camera) handset with no frills like a fingerprint sensor. But it is aimed at business and WileyFox vows to support it until “mid-2020”.

Microsoft has pledged to support W10M until October 2020, but the lack of development obliged HP to kill its ambitious efforts around the Elite x3.

There’s been little else to keep the platform alive since the Elite x3 was announced in February 2016. Alcatel released an edition of its Idol 4S phone this summer. And Trekstor a German PC builder, has launched a crowdsourced Win 10 Mobile on Indiegogo with 2015’s mid-range Snapdragon 617 processor inside.

The specifications of both the Trekstor and WileyFox devices are so low, that if you’re an enterprise left high and dry, you may as well try to pick up one of Microsoft’s final high-end Lumias, now two years old. But if you must, you can find more of the WileyFox here. ®

From the graaaaaave! WileyFox’s Windows 10 phone delayed again

WileyFox’s Windows 10 Mobile – yes, you read that correctly – has been delayed again, and will now bump into Santa doing his rounds early.

The catchily named “Wileyfox Pro with Windows 10” phone was announced in August, and WileyFox is sure that it can profit from Microsoft’s neglect of its Windows phone customers. Over at the main sales channel for the device, Amazon UK, it’s now due on “December 18”.

The Pro is a low-end (Snapdragon 210, 16GB/2GB, 8MP main camera) handset with no frills like a fingerprint sensor. But it is aimed at business and WileyFox vows to support it until “mid-2020”.

Microsoft has pledged to support W10M until October 2020, but the lack of development obliged HP to kill its ambitious efforts around the Elite x3.

There’s been little else to keep the platform alive since the Elite x3 was announced in February 2016. Alcatel released an edition of its Idol 4S phone this summer. And Trekstor a German PC builder, has launched a crowdsourced Win 10 Mobile on Indiegogo with 2015’s mid-range Snapdragon 617 processor inside.

The specifications of both the Trekstor and WileyFox devices are so low, that if you’re an enterprise left high and dry, you may as well try to pick up one of Microsoft’s final high-end Lumias, now two years old. But if you must, you can find more of the WileyFox here. ®

SC State player smiling again after health scare during Saturday game

Just about 24 hours after a scare – South Carolina State basketball player Tyvoris Solomon’s collapse during a game against North Carolina State University at PNC Arena – the player was smiling, grateful and reminding others about the importance of CPR training.

  • South Carolina State player collapses in loss at NC State

The game between the Bulldogs and the Wolfpack was delayed several minutes as paramedics worked desperately to revive the senior guard, who said nothing like Saturday’s incident has ever happened to him before.

Solomon and his family spoke to WRAL News from the UNC Rex hospital room where he is still recovering from his harrowing ordeal.

“I was talking to one of my teammates on the bench about an error he made defensively when one of my other teammates asked if I was alright. From there, I remember putting my head in my hands, and from there, I don’t remember,” Solomon said.

The next thing he recalls, Solomon was being wheeled towards the ambulance.

Around the same time, his mother, Delores Speights, got a phone call from his coach – the call no parent ever wants to get. She immediately sped towards Raleigh.

“Just to see his face, that gave me the comfort of knowing that there is a God and anything is possible,” she said.

Solomon’s survival is a credit to the quick action of Wake County EMS and S.C. State Athletic Trainer Tyler Long.

“I told him I love him,” Speights said. “He told me he was just doing his job.”

Solomon added his gratitude and his understanding of the importance of CPR education.

He knows that although Saturday will be remembered as a day when things went wrong for him, he was at the right place, at the right time, with the right people.

“I am so thankful that they were in the right place at the right time, (and) did not take a second thought of doing what it took to save my child,” Speights said.

Solomon is surrounded in his hospital room by well wishes, and he welcomed visitors on Sunday, some whom he had never met before.

“Dear Ty Solomon, I hope you feel better, I love basketball and I know you love it too. Love, Oliver,” one card reads.

“I’m sorry you got sick at the game yesterday. I am very happy that you’re okay. I hope I can watch you play basketball again with your team,” another says.

Speights said it’s all part of the role of a role model and college basketball player.

“Kids that don’t even know him, that are looking up to him, I’m just proud to say he’s my son,” she said.

Samsung’s W2018 Android Flip Phone Leaks Again In Gold

9c1ea_4 Samsung's W2018 Android Flip Phone Leaks Again In Gold

iPhone X Face ID Again Unlocked With Mask, Even With ‘Require Attention’ Turned On

Since the iPhone X launched earlier this month, people have been attempting to fool Face ID, the new biometric facial recognition feature built into the device as a primary security feature. Face ID has thus far been tricked by twins, children, and even a mask.

Vietnamese security company Bkav made headlines in mid-November after uploading a video featuring Face ID accessed by a mask, but there were several questions about the unlocking methods used in the video, including whether “Require Attention” was turned on. Today, Bkav shared a second video with a new mask and a clearer look at how the mask was used to spoof Face ID.

As described in an accompanying blog post, Bkav used a 3D printed mask made of stone powder, which cost approximately $200 to produce. 2D infrared images of eyes were then taped over the mask to emulate real eyes.

Bkav reset Face ID on camera and then set it up anew with the demonstrator’s face. “Require Attention for Face ID” and “Attention Aware Features” were both shown to be enabled on the iPhone X. For those unaware, “Require Attention for Face ID” is meant to add an extra layer of security by requiring you to look at your iPhone to use Face ID, and it’s one of the features that’s supposed to prevent Face ID from unlocking with a mask, with a photograph, or when you’re looking away from your phone.

After activating Face ID, the Bkav demonstrator unlocks the iPhone X normally with his own face, and then unlocks it once again with the mask. The mask appears to be able to unlock the iPhone X right away, with no failed attempts and no learning, as Face ID was set up from scratch just before the test. The mask’s 2D infrared eyes also appear to fool the “Require Attention for Face ID” setting.


Bkav claims the materials and tools used to create the mask are “casual for anyone” and that Face ID is “not secure enough to be used in business transactions,” but it’s worth noting that fooling Face ID in this way requires a 3D printer, several hundred dollars worth of materials, physical access to a person’s iPhone X, and detailed facial photographs that can be used to reconstruct a person’s face. Even then, if the 3D printed mask and the design of the infrared eyes aren’t perfect, Face ID will fail after five attempts.

Bkav believes Face ID is less secure than Touch ID because it’s easier to capture photographs from afar than it is to obtain a fingerprint, but this is still a very complex replication process that the average user does not need to be concerned with.

Bkav researchers said that making 3D model is very simple. A person can be secretly taken photos in just a few seconds when entering a room containing a pre-setup system of cameras located at different angles. Then, the photos will be processed by algorithms to make a 3D object.

It can be said that, until now, Fingerprint is still the most secure biometric technology. Collecting a fingerprint is much harder than taking photos from a distance.

Apple’s Face ID security white paper [PDF] outlines several scenarios where Face ID has a higher probability of being fooled, including with twins, siblings that look alike, and children under the age of 13, but masks are of particular interest because Face ID features a neural network that was “trained to spot and resist spoofing” to protect against “attempts to unlock your phone with photos or masks.” From Apple:

Face ID matches against depth information, which isn’t found in print or 2D digital photographs. It’s designed to protect against spoofing by masks or other techniques through the use of sophisticated anti-spoofing neural networks. Face ID is even attention-aware.

When Touch ID, Face ID’s predecessor, was first released in the iPhone 5s in 2013, there were many similar demonstrations of how it could be fooled with a fake fingerprint, but there’s little evidence that these methods were ever used to unlock devices in the real world on a wide scale basis, and it turned out to be something most iPhone users did not need to worry about. The same is likely true of Face ID.

Apple has made several improvements to Touch ID over the years, making it faster and more accurate, and similar improvements will undoubtedly be made to Face ID in the future. In the meantime, while Face ID can be fooled by a twin or a complicated facial replication process, it’s largely secure for most users and has received mostly positive reviews for its security and ease of use.

How this museum makes moldy machines work again, saving historic computers for the future

d5e3b_LathCarlson1-630x355 How this museum makes moldy machines work again, saving historic computers for the future
Living Computers: Museum + Labs Executive Director Lath Carlson. (GeekWire photo / Clare McGrane)

It came from a garage in North Carolina.

“We’d been looking for many years for an IBM 360,” Lath Carlson explained. “A gentleman had passed away and … we bought it sight unseen. It was so rare that when it popped up we wanted it immediately.”

But the executive director of Living Computers: Museum + Labs said the classic 1968 IBM 360/30 mainframe computer came with a multitude of unexpected surprises after sitting in a garage for some two decades. It had, Carlson said, been “getting progressively moldier and moldier and moldier … we actually had to have it specially sealed up to remediate all the mold in it. All the manuals that came with it, every page of every manual had to be vacuumed for all the mold spores on it.”

Now, Carlson said, the IBM mainframe boots up. And has a place of honor inside the carefully air-conditioned ‘cold room’ of the Seattle institution, said to be the only museum in the United States dedicated to both displaying and operating vintage computers.

d5e3b_LathCarlson1-630x355 How this museum makes moldy machines work again, saving historic computers for the future
Now mold-free, an historic IBM 360/30 mainframe. (GeekWire photo / Clare McGrane)

Living Computers was originally created by Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen as a by-appointment-only collection of historically significant computers, from the 1960s to the present. But in October 2012, the south-of-downtown Seattle location opened to the general public, with an emphasis, according to its website, on the “world’s largest collection of fully restored — and usable — supercomputers, mainframes, minicomputers and microcomputers.”

Allen himself wrote that one objective is to recognize “the efforts of those creative engineers who made some of the early breakthroughs in interactive computing that changed the world.” To that end, Living Computers has its own team of engineers that revitalize computers so visitors can experience how they work.

The museum’s Carlson joined GeekWire for an episode of our special podcast series on pop culture, science fiction, and the arts to walk through Living Computers’ two floors of hands-on exhibits, five years after the public unveiling. We discussed some of the stories behind the computers representing our digital heritage, as well as a main floor of lively, interactive displays of newer developments such as virtual reality and self-driving cars that preview tech’s future.

Listen here or download the MP3.

There is a lot unique inside Living Computers. The historic computing systems on its upper floor run the gamut from room-filling “big iron” mainframes like the IBM, to minicomputers (so named, Carlson said, not because they were that much smaller than mainframes, but because they generally could run on office power and cooling), to “microcomputers” — today’s personal computers. They provide both a window into each era’s tech, and sometimes its society.

d5e3b_LathCarlson1-630x355 How this museum makes moldy machines work again, saving historic computers for the future
GeekWire’s Frank Catalano and Living Computers’ Lath Carlson. (GeekWire photo / Clare McGrane)

Take the Digital Equipment Corporation PDP-7 minicomputer, introduced in 1964 and which Carlson said is the only one that’s still running in the world. With a photo of a pipe-puffing operator nearby. “A lot of the mainframes and minis built in the 1960s and ’70s had ashtrays built into the counters,” Carlson said. “You’d be sitting there working on the machine and, of course, you’re smoking a cigarette or a pipe and you need an ashtray.”

Or the Apple 1, one of about two hundred that Apple co-founders Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak originally made. Carlson said theirs is “the only one that’s regularly operated.” Visitors who try it, though, may be surprised by the computer’s case. There is none, only protective Plexiglas around a circuit board. “You just got the bare board; you had to supply your own monitor, keyboard, and everything,” Carlson said. All for a mere $666.66 in 1976 dollars.

d5e3b_LathCarlson1-630x355 How this museum makes moldy machines work again, saving historic computers for the future
Gates’ and Allen’s original Traf-O-Data (GeekWire photo / Clare McGrane)

Also unique from around the same time: a device the size of a large microwave oven called the Traf-O-Data. While the computer might not be familiar to many, its creators would be. “This is Paul Allen and Bill Gates’ first company,” Carlson said. “They started this in high school. This particular computer was built in a dorm room at U.W. … we have the only version they ever made, here in the museum.” (Allen, perhaps not coincidentally, is Living Computers’ founder.)

Yet Carlson says the most popular computer for visitors isn’t a one-of-a-kind. As a matter of fact, it has a reputation for telling its many users, “You have died of dysentery.”

“The Apple II really gets noticed a lot,” Carlson said. “I think that has to do with people recognize The Oregon Trail running on it, which is the most popular piece of software that we have here. And they recognize the look of it, mostly because they were used so much in computer labs and middle schools and high schools in the 1980s and into the 1990s.”

d5e3b_LathCarlson1-630x355 How this museum makes moldy machines work again, saving historic computers for the future
School fixture Apple IIe and The Oregon Trail. (GeekWire photo / Frank Catalano)

Living Computers’ critical mass of operating vintage computers, tied to its stated mission “to maintain running computer systems of historical importance,” has also made it a valuable go-to resource for other organizations.

“Something that’s becoming a frequent request for us is that somebody that has software on a format that’s no longer readable by machines that they have, including people like NASA, coming to us going, ‘Hey, we have these things on IBM tape. We have no way to read it. Can you read it?’” Carlson said. “Because in a lot of cases we’re the only people in the entire world that has the operating hardware to read those old media formats.”

d5e3b_LathCarlson1-630x355 How this museum makes moldy machines work again, saving historic computers for the future
Lively exhibits of computing’s future on the main floor. (GeekWire photo / Dan DeLong)

Those requests represent a cautionary tale for today’s individual hoarders of old technology, too. “This is an under-appreciated global problem that we have,” Carlson said. It’s not just that the information is in unreadable formats. “They have it on a media that’s actually physically falling apart. So if you have old CDs, DVDs, Jaz drives, floppies, there’s a high likelihood that whatever you think is on there is actually gone forever,” he said.

His advice? “Load your stuff to the cloud because it may not be readable very soon.” Carlson only has to go to an earlier generation of data storage for horror stories. “A lot of the old magnetic tape and especially the disk packs, the physical particles on the disks are falling off,” he said. “A lot of times when we go to read it, when we spin it up to speed to read it, all the particles will fly off and there’s nothing left.”

d5e3b_LathCarlson1-630x355 How this museum makes moldy machines work again, saving historic computers for the future
Unlike magnetic media, paper punch cards persist. (GeekWire photo / Clare McGrane)

It’s that kind of experience that appears to take Carlson full circle to continue to respect the durability of some of the oldest systems in Living Computers’ decades-deep collection. “Fortunately, a lot of our machines can run off of paper tape,” he said. “Paper tape or punch cards actually hold up just fine because it’s literally physical holes punched in paper.”

These are the kinds of insights a museum that just displays static, non-working technology is unlikely to be able to have. “We really focus on running the machines,” Carlson said, “and not just collecting.”

Podcast production and editing by Clare McGrane.

 Previously in this series: Public radio’s digital moment: Smartphones, streaming, and the future of listening

KGI again says 2018 iPhones will feature gigabit LTE technology

Ming-Chi Kuo of KGI Securities is out with what he refers to as “part two” of his analysis into Apple’s work on creating a 5G iPhone and what the near future holds.

This investors note says that Apple may adopt faster antenna modules in all of its 2018 iPhones, and offers more information about suppliers for next year’s iPhone antenna modules. Much of the report reiterates a note from KGI last week.


2f835_spigen-teka-on-airpods KGI again says 2018 iPhones will feature gigabit LTE technology

Spigen TEKA RA200 Airpods Earhooks Cover

First off, Kuo explains that antenna design is a key factor in the “anticipated boost to LTE transmission speed” coming with the 2018 iPhone lineup. He says the new iPhones introduced next year will be capable of supporting 4×4 MIMO standards, allowing for improved speeds for users.

Furthermore, Kuo says Apple’s move to new cellular modules will cause shifts in the supply chain. For supplier Career, Kuo says Apple’s upgrade will help improve average selling price and give it a larger chunk of the order allocation. Currently, Career supplies 20 percent to 25 percent of Apple’s LTE antenna orders, but that could rise to as high as 50 percent next year.

KGI’s report last week explained that Intel will likely provide 70 percent to 80 percent of the new baseband chips for iPhone.

Kuo’s report is notable as many users have wondered when Apple might support 4×4 MIMO as gigabit LTE becomes more common. The 4×4 MIMO antenna structure also allows for improved coverage, especially in low-coverage areas. Currently, several high-end Android devices on the market support 4×4 MIMO technology, while the iPhone 8 and iPhone X lag behind at 2×2 tech.

While Apple is also working on 5G support for future iPhones, these are nice advancements that should work to hold users over until the true next-generation of mobile broadband is available.

A report earlier this month explained that Apple is working closely with Intel on making 5G modems for future iPhone models. Separately, KGI predicted that Apple’s 2018 iPhone lineup will include new 6.5-inch OLED and 6.1-inch LCD models alongside the current 5.8-inch form factor of the iPhone X.

How I Lost Weight and Learned to Love Thanksgiving Again

Advertisement

Supported by

The New Health Care

When we moralize about food, we remove joy from eating and forget the benefits of moderation.

Image
CreditJulian Glander

By

Nov. 20, 2017

In our house, there are no pictures of my wife and me that are more than a few years old.

When I was a medical resident, nearly two decades ago, I didn’t take very good care of myself. I was a pediatrician, and I counseled patients and parents all the time about how to eat right and get enough exercise. But I couldn’t seem to figure that out for myself. I gained a lot of weight, and so did my wife, Aimee.

After our second child was born, Aimee decided she needed to make a change. She told me she was going to try Weight Watchers. Since it seemed silly for us to prepare two meals at a time, I decided to join her.

It worked. Weight Watchers then was mostly focused on fat reduction, calorie counting and increased fiber. We both lost weight. I didn’t lose all that I wanted to, but it was certainly an improvement. Unfortunately, it was hard to keep sticking to the program. There were too many days I was hungry. I became too obsessed with “low fat,” as fat seemed to be how “points” were calculated. (Today, Weight Watchers points focus on calories, sugar, fat and protein.)

Years later, when I decided to try to lose weight again, I focused on exercise. I made it through the torments of P90X, P90X3 and Insanity. Each workout regimen had its own diet plan, with a list of foods to avoid. I stuck to none of them for more than four or five months. They were too hard, and after initial success, my weight loss stalled.

Most recently, I tried to go “low-carb.” I became convinced, by reading books and studies, that carbohydrates were the true danger, not fats. I eliminated sugar from my diet almost completely. Once again, my weight dropped, but it eventually stopped falling.

My experience is not abnormal. Studies of diets show that many of them succeed at first. But results slow, and often reverse over time. No one diet substantially outperforms another. The evidence does not favor any one greatly over any other.

That has not slowed experts from declaring otherwise. Doctors, weight-loss gurus, personal trainers and bloggers all push radically different opinions about what we should be eating, and why. We should eat the way cave men did. We should avoid gluten completely. We should eat only organic. No dairy. No fats. No meat. These different waves of advice push us in one direction, then another. More often than not, we end up right where we started, but with thinner wallets and thicker waistlines.

I’m a physician and researcher with a particular interest in analyzing dietary health research, and even I get dizzy with the different perspectives on something as seemingly simple as the benefits of brown rice or the dangers of red meat. This is one reason I’ve decided to focus much of my writing on dietary health. I want to be able to advise my patients about what healthful eating looks like, and eat that way myself.

These conflicting opinions about nutrition have one thing in common: the belief that some foods will kill you — or, at least, that those foods are why you’re not at the weight you’d like to be. This is an attitude about food that actually has its roots in an earlier and opposite idea — that some foods can keep us from dying (think of sailors avoiding scurvy by eating citrus). Indeed, some of the earliest “expert” advice about food was predicated on the notion that some foods can save us.

When many more Americans were malnourished than are today, making sure they got more of foods containing things like vitamin B and C made sense. Today, the vast majority of people in the United States are not suffering from vitamin or nutritional deficiencies. Advice is usually delivered in terms of deprivation, not supplementation.

Much of this advice comes in the form of moralizing. But by making so much of our focus on what we’re doing “wrong,” we’ve removed much of the joy from eating and cooking. I made sure to avoid negative tones a couple of years ago when I drew up a manifesto/road guide we called simple rules for healthy eating. They include the idea that you aren’t going to avoid all processed foods, but you might try to limit them. The one I felt most passionately about was No. 7 — “Eat with other people, especially people you care about, as often as possible.” But lately, I’ve been thinking that No. 2 — “Eat as much home-cooked food as possible” — may be the most important.

I’ve recently been learning more about cooking theory — not so much following recipes, but understanding why those recipes work. A favorite guide in this quest is “Salt, Fat, Acid, Heat” by Samin Nosrat. Right there in the title are two “forbidden” elements. They’re also some of the main reasons good food tastes good.

The home-cooked food rule probably did more than any other to help Aimee and me get down to reasonable weights. Today, we’re much happier with how we look and feel. There are pictures of us looking happy in recent years around the house. Thanksgiving has reclaimed its mantle as my favorite holiday, because it’s so centered on food and family.

And yet. While I’ve adopted a much healthier attitude toward food in general, I sometimes find myself slipping into old habits. These last few months, I’ve been trying to lose weight again. I’m not obese, and I’m healthy. But my weight and height place me in the “overweight” category, and I think I could be thinner. As before, I tried going low-carb. I lost weight initially, then hit a plateau. I’ve been getting frustrated.

I was complaining of this to Aimee last week when my oldest child, Jacob, asked me why I was dieting. He couldn’t understand the point. I had no answer. I don’t think it will make me healthier or make me live longer. It won’t improve my quality of life. I won’t be in better shape. My clothes would fit the same. I’m not even sure anyone would see a difference.

I’m still too liable to think that being thin is the same thing as being healthy. I’m still too inclined to think that dieting is the same as healthful eating. Neither are true. Too often I’m chasing some imagined ideal that has no real-world consequences. My other son, Noah, has my physique and may someday find it all too easy to put on pounds. What message am I sending to him when I obsess over the number on the scale?

Jacob’s wiser than me. I’m still learning. One theme of my Upshot articles is that we should weigh the benefits and the harms in any health decision. When it comes to food, too often we focus only on the latter. When my daughter, Sydney, made cupcakes last night and asked me to try one, I did. The joy it brought her, and me, was worth it.


Aaron E. Carroll is a professor of pediatrics at Indiana University School of Medicine who blogs on health research and policy at The Incidental Economist and makes videos at Healthcare Triage. Follow him on Twitter at @aaronecarroll. He is the author of “The Bad Food Bible: How and Why to Eat Sinfully,” from which parts of this article were adapted.

Aaron E. Carroll is a professor of pediatrics at Indiana University School of Medicine and the author of “The Bad Food Bible.” @aaronecarroll

Trending

Bettmann

Dispelling misconceptions about what’s driving income inequality in the U.S.

Jekesai Njikizana/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images
John Taggart for The New York Times

Disruptions and delays have roiled the system this year. But the crisis was long in the making, fueled by a litany of errors, a Times investigation shows.

Associated Press

Most of Charles Manson’s followers were young women who had fled middle-class homes. Here’s a look at where they are now.

Paul Hosefros/The New York Times

Revisiting the 1990s and realizing that impeachment was reasonable.

Advertisement

How I Lost Weight and Learned to Love Thanksgiving Again

Advertisement

Supported by

The New Health Care

When we moralize about food, we remove joy from eating and forget the benefits of moderation.

Image
CreditJulian Glander

By

Nov. 20, 2017

In our house, there are no pictures of my wife and me that are more than a few years old.

When I was a medical resident, nearly two decades ago, I didn’t take very good care of myself. I was a pediatrician, and I counseled patients and parents all the time about how to eat right and get enough exercise. But I couldn’t seem to figure that out for myself. I gained a lot of weight, and so did my wife, Aimee.

After our second child was born, Aimee decided she needed to make a change. She told me she was going to try Weight Watchers. Since it seemed silly for us to prepare two meals at a time, I decided to join her.

It worked. Weight Watchers then was mostly focused on fat reduction, calorie counting and increased fiber. We both lost weight. I didn’t lose all that I wanted to, but it was certainly an improvement. Unfortunately, it was hard to keep sticking to the program. There were too many days I was hungry. I became too obsessed with “low fat,” as fat seemed to be how “points” were calculated. (Today, Weight Watchers points focus on calories, sugar, fat and protein.)

Years later, when I decided to try to lose weight again, I focused on exercise. I made it through the torments of P90X, P90X3 and Insanity. Each workout regimen had its own diet plan, with a list of foods to avoid. I stuck to none of them for more than four or five months. They were too hard, and after initial success, my weight loss stalled.

Most recently, I tried to go “low-carb.” I became convinced, by reading books and studies, that carbohydrates were the true danger, not fats. I eliminated sugar from my diet almost completely. Once again, my weight dropped, but it eventually stopped falling.

My experience is not abnormal. Studies of diets show that many of them succeed at first. But results slow, and often reverse over time. No one diet substantially outperforms another. The evidence does not favor any one greatly over any other.

That has not slowed experts from declaring otherwise. Doctors, weight-loss gurus, personal trainers and bloggers all push radically different opinions about what we should be eating, and why. We should eat the way cave men did. We should avoid gluten completely. We should eat only organic. No dairy. No fats. No meat. These different waves of advice push us in one direction, then another. More often than not, we end up right where we started, but with thinner wallets and thicker waistlines.

I’m a physician and researcher with a particular interest in analyzing dietary health research, and even I get dizzy with the different perspectives on something as seemingly simple as the benefits of brown rice or the dangers of red meat. This is one reason I’ve decided to focus much of my writing on dietary health. I want to be able to advise my patients about what healthful eating looks like, and eat that way myself.

These conflicting opinions about nutrition have one thing in common: the belief that some foods will kill you — or, at least, that those foods are why you’re not at the weight you’d like to be. This is an attitude about food that actually has its roots in an earlier and opposite idea — that some foods can keep us from dying (think of sailors avoiding scurvy by eating citrus). Indeed, some of the earliest “expert” advice about food was predicated on the notion that some foods can save us.

When many more Americans were malnourished than are today, making sure they got more of foods containing things like vitamin B and C made sense. Today, the vast majority of people in the United States are not suffering from vitamin or nutritional deficiencies. Advice is usually delivered in terms of deprivation, not supplementation.

Much of this advice comes in the form of moralizing. But by making so much of our focus on what we’re doing “wrong,” we’ve removed much of the joy from eating and cooking. I made sure to avoid negative tones a couple of years ago when I drew up a manifesto/road guide we called simple rules for healthy eating. They include the idea that you aren’t going to avoid all processed foods, but you might try to limit them. The one I felt most passionately about was No. 7 — “Eat with other people, especially people you care about, as often as possible.” But lately, I’ve been thinking that No. 2 — “Eat as much home-cooked food as possible” — may be the most important.

I’ve recently been learning more about cooking theory — not so much following recipes, but understanding why those recipes work. A favorite guide in this quest is “Salt, Fat, Acid, Heat” by Samin Nosrat. Right there in the title are two “forbidden” elements. They’re also some of the main reasons good food tastes good.

The home-cooked food rule probably did more than any other to help Aimee and me get down to reasonable weights. Today, we’re much happier with how we look and feel. There are pictures of us looking happy in recent years around the house. Thanksgiving has reclaimed its mantle as my favorite holiday, because it’s so centered on food and family.

And yet. While I’ve adopted a much healthier attitude toward food in general, I sometimes find myself slipping into old habits. These last few months, I’ve been trying to lose weight again. I’m not obese, and I’m healthy. But my weight and height place me in the “overweight” category, and I think I could be thinner. As before, I tried going low-carb. I lost weight initially, then hit a plateau. I’ve been getting frustrated.

I was complaining of this to Aimee last week when my oldest child, Jacob, asked me why I was dieting. He couldn’t understand the point. I had no answer. I don’t think it will make me healthier or make me live longer. It won’t improve my quality of life. I won’t be in better shape. My clothes would fit the same. I’m not even sure anyone would see a difference.

I’m still too liable to think that being thin is the same thing as being healthy. I’m still too inclined to think that dieting is the same as healthful eating. Neither are true. Too often I’m chasing some imagined ideal that has no real-world consequences. My other son, Noah, has my physique and may someday find it all too easy to put on pounds. What message am I sending to him when I obsess over the number on the scale?

Jacob’s wiser than me. I’m still learning. One theme of my Upshot articles is that we should weigh the benefits and the harms in any health decision. When it comes to food, too often we focus only on the latter. When my daughter, Sydney, made cupcakes last night and asked me to try one, I did. The joy it brought her, and me, was worth it.


Aaron E. Carroll is a professor of pediatrics at Indiana University School of Medicine who blogs on health research and policy at The Incidental Economist and makes videos at Healthcare Triage. Follow him on Twitter at @aaronecarroll. He is the author of “The Bad Food Bible: How and Why to Eat Sinfully,” from which parts of this article were adapted.

Aaron E. Carroll is a professor of pediatrics at Indiana University School of Medicine and the author of “The Bad Food Bible.” @aaronecarroll

Trending

Bettmann

Dispelling misconceptions about what’s driving income inequality in the U.S.

Jekesai Njikizana/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images
John Taggart for The New York Times

Disruptions and delays have roiled the system this year. But the crisis was long in the making, fueled by a litany of errors, a Times investigation shows.

Associated Press

Most of Charles Manson’s followers were young women who had fled middle-class homes. Here’s a look at where they are now.

Paul Hosefros/The New York Times

Revisiting the 1990s and realizing that impeachment was reasonable.

Advertisement

How to get Face ID on the iPhone X to try again when it misses your …

I’ve been using the iPhone X for about a week, and, like Nilay Patel said in his review: “The good news is that Face ID generally works great. The bad news is that sometimes it doesn’t.”

I’ve been trying to figure out what to do in those cases when it doesn’t. And, thanks to a complaint on Twitter (which, as I always say, is what Twitter is for), I have an answer.

But first, my overall take is that when Face ID works, it is magically better than Touch ID. Your phone just feels like it’s unlocked all the time, without requiring you to think about its security at all. However, the problem is that when it doesn’t work, it’s not super clear what you’re supposed to do about it.

When Touch ID fails, you just try it a second time. You reposition your thumb or you wipe your thumb or you say “screw it” and punch in the passcode. When Face ID fails, you reposition the entire phone or you just swipe up on the home bar thing. Usually, that gets it to catch.

But my particularly weird problem is that I really, really like the feature that hides notifications on the lock screen until Face ID recognizes you. But when it’s sitting on your desk (or better yet, your angled wireless charger), sometimes it won’t. At that point, I want to see my notifications, but Face ID isn’t catching. So, what next?

  • Looking away and back again doesn’t seem to work.
  • If I swipe up, I have to swipe down again to see my notifications. Annoying.
  • I don’t want to tap on the notification without seeing what it actually is. Annoying.
  • I don’t want to pick up the phone to reposition it; the darn thing is just sitting on my desk. Also annoying.
  • I don’t want to power the screen down with the sleep button and then power it up again. Again, also annoying!

I just want to see what my notifications are without picking up my phone or doing something awkward. What do I do? The iPhone doesn’t tell me.

Luckily, Alex Anderson on Twitter has told me. Give the home bar a little wiggle. Drag it up like about a quarter-inch and then push it down again. Don’t drag it up far enough to unlock the phone, just do a tiny wiggle. Face ID will then give it another shot and — by this point — you’re probably giving it the proper attention to make it work this time.

Is this a silly problem? Yes. But it’s also a thing I do hundreds of times a day, so I want it to work. Phones should be accommodating to their users, adjusting to them instead of vice versa. Sometimes it feels like the iPhone X doesn’t do that.

Apple has made the best-case scenario of unlocking your phone way better with Face ID, but good software design should guide the user toward what to do when things don’t go exactly as planned. I wish the iPhone X was as good at helping me figure out how to use it in those cases as my pal Alex on Twitter was.




Advertise here