Google Pixel 3 Lite leaks in video review: Should you expect flagship photo quality?

The Google Pixel 3 Lite has to be the worst kept secret in the mobile industry right now, and the leaks keep coming. This time, a video review has been posted to YouTube (seen above), giving us a more extensive look at a pre-production device.

The video review, spotted by Android Police, purportedly comes from Ukrainian tech website Andro-news.com. The channel seems rather new though, only featuring three videos. The website itself hasn’t been updated with the Pixel 3 Lite review either, so you’ll want to take this video with a grain of salt.

Anyway, the reviewer notes that the phone is made out of plastic, and has a headphone jack at the top of the device. This echoes the first Pixel 3 Lite leak, which revealed a plastic build and 3.5mm jack.

The reviewer also recaps the specs, which seem to align with prior leaks too. That means a Snapdragon 670 chipset, 4GB of RAM, 32GB of storage, a 5.56-inch full HD+ LCD screen (no notch here), a 12MP main camera, 8MP selfie camera, and a 2,915mAh battery.
Speaking of the battery, the Pixel 3 Lite is said to offer similar endurance to the standard Pixel 3. Unfortunately, we don’t get any figures in this regard, such as screen-on time. We thought battery life was the Pixel 3’s Achilles heel though, as the device only achieved between four and five hours of screen-on time.
As for the camera? The reviewer claimed that the Pixel 3 Lite’s camera quality was identical to that of the Pixel 3. We’d need to take a closer look at the two devices to figure out if this is the case. But it wouldn’t be hard to believe, as unofficial Google Camera ports have delivered great results on budget phones.

The reviewer adds that the device will be available in Spring, after the Google I/O conference. So I wouldn’t bet against more leaks emerging before then, if this launch window is indeed the case.

Android Q may include a dark theme and desktop mode

Many Android users still don’t have Pie yet, but details are already emerging for its follow-up. XDA says it has obtained a very early build of Android Q (Quiche? Queso?) that hints at Google’s plans. For one, there’s a system-wide dark theme. This might be particularly helpful if you’re trying to save power on an OLED-equipped phone or just don’t want to blind yourself at night. There’s a developer option to force the dark mode on apps that don’t support it, hinting that it may take a while before every app honors the feature.

You’ll also find a developer option that would “force experimental desktop mode on secondary displays,” which might refer to a Samsung DeX-style view. Don’t count on it reaching the finished version (it wouldn’t even work when XDA enabled it), but Google appears to be considering the idea at a minimum.

Most other elements in this build are minor (such as wallpaper for all devices with always-on displays). There is an important change to privacy, though. Much as with iOS, you can limit permissions for location and other sensitive features so that it runs only while an app is in the foreground. You wouldn’t have to worry about an app gathering data behind your back, or a GPS app chewing up your battery when you aren’t using it. A revamp of the overall permissions section would give you a quick glimpse of the features your apps are using.

You’ll probably have to be patient before you can try Android Q yourself, regardless of how many elements survive the development gauntlet. Google didn’t release the Android P public preview until May of 2018, and the completed version waited until August. This is more of a tentative glance at the future than a definitive peek.

https://www.engadget.com/2019/01/17/android-q-dark-theme-desktop-mode/

773 million email addresses have been leaked – check if yours is on the list

We’re just over two weeks into 2019, and one of the biggest data leaks in recent years has surfaced. Today, renowned security researcher Troy Hunt reported a massive leak consisting of 773 million unique email IDs and 21 million unique passwords, which he refers to as Collection #1.

Hunt said that multiple people reached out to him last week and pointed to a constellation of 12,000 files with a total size of 87GB, and nearly 2.7 billion records, hosted on MEGA. He added that the files have been removed from the hosting platform, but they persist on a popular hacking forum (that he didn’t name). Hunt said the forum post described the source of the data as “a collection of 2000+ dehashed databases and Combos (combinations of email addresses and passwords) stored by topic.”
This is arguably the biggest data leak after Yahoo’s colossal debacle of 2013 that affected nearly three billion accounts. The only consolation is there’s no sensitive information – like credit card details – in the leaked files.
How to check if you’re affected

You can easily check if your email ID was a part of the Collection #1 thanks to Hunt, who has integrated the database in his website Have I been Pwned. The site is a database to search email IDs that have been part of data leaks.

To check yours, just head to the site, and enter your email ID in the dialog box. If your email ID was not part of the data breach, you’ll get a message as shown below, and you can rest easy.

https://thenextweb.com/security/2019/01/17/773-million-email-addresses-have-been-leaked-check-if-yours-is-on-the-list/

US legislators introduce bills targeting Chinese tech companies

A bipartisan group of legislators in the United States has introduced bills that would prohibit the sale of US chips or other components to Chinese telecommunications companies that violate Washington’s sanctions or export control laws.

The proposed law was introduced on Wednesday shortly before the Wall Street Journal reported that US authorities are in the “advanced” stages of a criminal probe that could result in an indictment of Chinese technology giant Huawei, the second-largest global smartphone maker and biggest producer of telecommunications equipment.

Citing anonymous sources, the Journal said that an indictment could be coming soon on allegations that Huawei stole Tappy, a T-Mobile technology which mimicked human fingers and was used to test smartphones.

Huawei said in a statement the company and T-Mobile settled their disputes in 2017 following a US jury verdict that found “neither damage, unjust enrichment nor willful and malicious conduct by Huawei in T-Mobile’s trade secret claim”.
On Capitol Hill, the bills introduced by Senator Tom Cotton and Representative Mike Gallagher, both Republicans, along with Senator Chris Van Hollen and Representative Ruben Gallego, both Democrats, specifically cite Huawei and ZTE, both of which are viewed with suspicion in the US because of fears that their switches and other gear could be used to spy on US citizens.

Both have also been accused of failing to respect US sanctions on Iran.

“Huawei is effectively an intelligence-gathering arm of the Chinese Communist Party whose founder and CEO was an engineer for the People’s Liberation Army,” Cotton wrote in a statement. “If Chinese telecom companies like Huawei violate our sanctions or export control laws, they should receive nothing less than the death penalty – which this denial order would provide.”

The move is the latest in a long list of actions taken to fight what some in Washington call China’s cheating through intellectual property theft, illegal corporate subsidies and rules hampering US corporations that want to sell their goods in China.

The proposed law and investigation are two of several challenges that Huawei faces in the US market.

In addition to allegations of sanctions-busting and intellectual property theft, Washington has been pressing allies to refrain from buying Huawei’s switches and other gear because of fears they will be used by Beijing for espionage.
On Capitol Hill, the bills introduced by Senator Tom Cotton and Representative Mike Gallagher, both Republicans, along with Senator Chris Van Hollen and Representative Ruben Gallego, both Democrats, specifically cite Huawei and ZTE, both of which are viewed with suspicion in the US because of fears that their switches and other gear could be used to spy on US citizens.

Both have also been accused of failing to respect US sanctions on Iran.

“Huawei is effectively an intelligence-gathering arm of the Chinese Communist Party whose founder and CEO was an engineer for the People’s Liberation Army,” Cotton wrote in a statement. “If Chinese telecom companies like Huawei violate our sanctions or export control laws, they should receive nothing less than the death penalty – which this denial order would provide.”

The move is the latest in a long list of actions taken to fight what some in Washington call China’s cheating through intellectual property theft, illegal corporate subsidies and rules hampering US corporations that want to sell their goods in China.

The proposed law and investigation are two of several challenges that Huawei faces in the US market.

In addition to allegations of sanctions-busting and intellectual property theft, Washington has been pressing allies to refrain from buying Huawei’s switches and other gear because of fears they will be used by Beijing for espionage.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/01/legislators-introduce-bills-targeting-chinese-tech-companies-190117024458606.html

Jack Bogle Was Proud He Wasn’t a Billionaire

In the summer of 2012, I called John C. Bogle to discuss his favorite subject: index funds and the plight of rank-and-file investors. He had urged me to reach out to him “anytime I needed him,” and I took him up on that offer regularly.

This time, it took a while to reach him. When I finally got through, he immediately apologized.

“I’m sorry, I’ve been having a hard time,” he said. I replied I was sorry to hear that and asked what the problem was.

“It’s my heart,” he said. “You’ve reached me in the hospital.”

Jack was 83 then. Sixteen years earlier, after six heart attacks, he’d had a heart transplant. That was no secret. “I’ve got a young man’s heart,” he would say. “It’s wonderful.”

But now, Jack told me that his body periodically reacted against the heart, and that he sometimes needed urgent treatment. This was one of those times.

“It’s happened before,” he said. “I’ll be all right. And now, what can I do for you?”

We talked at length, and his voice got stronger as he launched into a lecture on “the relentless rules of arithmetic” for mutual funds. He said they amounted to this: The fees charged by brokerages, fund companies and advisers were sapping the returns of millions of hard-working people who were trying to save for retirement. Reduce the fees and give the money to the people who need it, he said. That, he said, was what his career was all about.

After a few minutes, he faltered, and we agreed to resume the conversation a week or two later. Jack asked me not to reveal that stretch of weakness and hospitalization — or other bouts that occurred later — and I didn’t, while he was alive.

Now, after the announcement of his death on Wednesday, I believe it’s fair to let people know how strong he was, and how idealistic.

[Read the obituary of Mr. Bogle.]

The basic biographical details are well known. A poor boy and a brilliant student, he discovered an interest in asset management — and the burden of fees on investors — while an undergraduate at Princeton. He had his ups and downs in the fund business but made history by popularizing the index fund and creating Vanguard, giving up his chance at great wealth by eschewing ownership of the company.

The Vanguard Group, as he structured it, was owned by its mutual funds, which were owned, in turn, by fund shareholders and dedicated to low-cost investing. He was paid well and accrued what would be a great fortune for most of us — he told me last year his assets were “well below $100 million” — but it’s small change by the standards of money management.
Editors’ Picks
At Trump’s Inauguration, $10,000 for Makeup and Lots of Room Service
Where 518 Inmates Sleep in Space for 170, and Gangs Hold It Together
The 20 Best TV Dramas Since ‘The Sopranos’

Consider that Vanguard says today it has $4.9 trillion under management. If Jack Bogle, and his heirs, were the main shareholders of a company as large and profitable as Vanguard, they would surely be billionaires many times over.

Jack was proud he was not a billionaire, though he didn’t say so publicly.

“I feel funny about it,” he told me. After all, in the United States, titans of industry are supposed to be rich. People are so often measured by the size of their financial assets, he said, and his were not really awesome.

“I don’t share those values,” he said, “but I’ve still been influenced by them.” In fact, he said, he was sure some rich people wouldn’t really respect him if they knew he wasn’t as wealthy as they were.

But that’s the point, of course. He built something bigger than personal wealth: a reasonable way for great masses of people to get a more equitable share of the world’s financial pie.

His index funds have multiplied at Vanguard and been copied and transformed by many others. The funds aren’t perfect. Jack acknowledged that if index funds became dominant enough, they might distort the marketplace. That is a problem others will have to deal with.

He wasn’t a doctrinaire indexer, either. In his personal portfolio, Jack held shares of actively managed funds, including Vanguard’s Wellington fund, founded by his mentor and former boss, Walter L. Morgan. But Wellington’s fees have always been low and are now only 0.17 percent, according to Morningstar, among the lowest for any actively managed fund.