Computing desk
< June 12	<< May \| June \| Jul >>	June 14 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Computing Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

June 13[edit]

Websites detecting my mouse movements[edit]

For some time various websites have been programmed to detect when the mouse makes a quick movement to the top of the page which is assumed to be the user reaching for the tab to close it so the website responds with some obnoxious request to join their stupid newsletter or some other crap no-one in the history of the Internet has ever been in the least bit interested in. Often I'm not even trying to leave the website but I browse with many tabs open and multi-task. How do I suppress this bull**** so I never get pestered in this way again? Also can we please make it crime? --185.230.100.66 (talk) 04:39, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

For the latter, you will have to ask your politicians. For the former, the only way to really avoid it is to deactivate Javascript altogether (e.g. by using NoScript), but be warned that this breaks a large part of the internet (including sections that could very well work without JS). I will also mention that there are keyboard shortcuts to close one tab in most browsers (on Firefox and Chrome on Windows and Linux, ctrl-W does the trick), but that is only a workaround. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 06:27, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much. No Script is now installed. I used to have this ages ago but switched browsers at some point and forgot about it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.230.100.66 (talk) 08:51, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Refreshing flash memory by applying power periodically?[edit]

Depending on the level of wear to flash memory, data in a device could be lost after a few months or years since the device last recieved power. Would it be possible to make a device using an alkaline or non-rechargeable lithium battery that simply applies the right voltage to the terminals of the flash memory device (either USB or a microSD card) in order to refresh the memory? this picture shows the pinout of a microSD card. Would it be enough to simply apply power to GND and VCC to refresh the memory without any other signals on the other terminals? --185.230.100.66 (talk) 05:07, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Do not confuse Flash memory with DRAM whose data must be continually refreshed. Applying power to a Flash memory does not refresh the stored data which is in the form of charges on floating-gate transistors. Arranging unnecessary extra power cycles as the OP suggests is possible but is likely only to hasten wearout of the memory due either to excessive program - erase cycles or "read disturbance", see Flash_memory#Limitations. RAID (Redundant Array of Independent Disks) technology offers ways to secure long-term data storage, where levels greater than RAID 0 protect against failures of whole physical drives. DroneB (talk) 10:59, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Negative. Flash memory will only retain data for a limited period of time before the memory cells lose their charge. This time could be as little as a few months if the memory is heavily worn by having been written to many times. I'm now thinking, however, based on my subsequent reading of Internet forum posts, that connecting power to a flash memory device will not top up the memory cells. It would be necessary to read the data off the memory and then write it back again so quite a complicated device would be needed to do this periodically. I might just have to put an annual event in my calendar reminding me to manually refresh my flash storage. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.230.100.66 (talk) 15:38, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Bad idea. The more you delete and write new information, the more quickly the memory in the device will start to degrade. See "Data storage lifespans: How long will media really last?". DroneB (talk) 21:36, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a cite for the idea that Flash will only retain data for a few months? The page linked by DroneB above says the life expectancy of data on Flash is more than 10 years. This page agrees with that.[1] I certainly have flash drives in my possession that are over 2 years old and have not lost any data. I've also worked professionally over the last 8 years developing consumer devices containing Flash memory and have never heard of a Flash part losing data just due to age, as opposed to excessive erase cycles. There are literally millions of units of the product I'm working on in the field, some up to 8 years old, and I think I'd have heard if any significant fraction of them were spontaneously losing data. CodeTalker (talk) 22:39, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Enterprise-style flash media stored unpowered, in hot temperatures, can degrade in days. See here for example. --Wirbelwind(ヴィルヴェルヴィント) 22:14, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I was hoping someone else with refs of more knowledge would comment but since no one has, it's worth remembering modern SSDs are not simple flash memory chips. The controllers are supposed to do their best to keep them working. In other words, if retention is a problem with the flash chips, keeping the SSD powered (at least for consumer devices) should be enough to ensure they stay fine not because the flash chips themselves just need power but because the controller will refresh the data if they work out it's necessary. (Although I assume it's obvious whatever you are storing it on, if you only have a single copy you're going to get data loss one day.) That's why you will get millions of results talking about unpowered SSDs data retention. Simpler devices like SD cards or non SSD USB flash sticks can be more limiting. Enterprise drives may in some situations expected this to be host managed. Nil Einne (talk) 15:25, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The most reliable cryptocurrency[edit]

I have been into cryptocurrencies since its inception and I think blockchain is something that is going to be very big soon. There are a lot of cryptocurrency pages on Wikipedia already like Bitcoin, Litecoin, Ripple, NEO and the list goes on.

However, now I need help finding the most reliable or sustainable cryptocurrency. Just because it is a new phenomenon and I get a lot of search results that don't seem to have credible information.

I would love to get help from Wikipedians that are into fintech or crypto.

Thanks.EddieCrypto (talk) 07:46, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There are literally thousands of cryptocurrencies with new ones being released s few times a week (most of them seem to be rubbish trying to make a quick buck). I doubt anyone can give you a straight answer when there's so much information to read through and so much chaff in the way. 185.230.100.66 (talk) 08:50, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There are two issues that you should start with: Supply and Stability. Using Bitcoin as an example, we know the supply. There is a limited number of bitcoins available. Unlike real currency, you can't just print more. There is also a limit to how many can be produced. At the current rate, we are about halfway through mining all bitcoins that will be available. That doesn't mean that they can't change the algorithm to make more available - but I wouldn't expect them to be called bitcoins. They might be called bitcoinV2, with bitcoins being the originals. Overall, nobody can just say "Hey, I made a lot more bitcoins, so now I'm rich." That means that bitcoins should be stable. The value is based solely on a real limited supply and the ever-changing demand. But, there is no authority over bitcoin. It isn't hard to find new articles that discuss loss of bitcoins. They come in pairs. There is article 1 that says "Bitcoin Service XXXX was hacked and lost all their bitcoins!" which is accompanied by a completely unrelated new article about "The owner of Bitcoin Service XXXX shut down the service and suddenly very rich." By design, bitcoins do not have any authority. So, if I steal your bitcoins, you can't do anything about it legally. There is nobody to complain to. You just have to deal with it. Hard currency in most countries is insured. In the United States, if someone robs your bank, your cash is insured by the FDIC. If you use a credit union, there is a similar credit union union that insures them. You put $100 in the bank and you know that your $100 is protected. You put your bitcoins in a bitcoin bank and you hope that the owner doesn't decide to either take them himself or get paid off to let someone else take them. 209.149.113.5 (talk) 11:49, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

On the topic of credit unions, the "union of unions" or "FDIC-like entity" is the National Credit Union Administration - at least in the United States. That "NCUA" is the acronym you want to see before you engage the services of a credit union. As of 2011, it provides parity coverage almost identical to FDIC coverage at other institutions.

Notably, Bitcoin exchanges do not provide deposit insurance of any kind; they are not operating like deposit banks nor like credit unions. However, Bitcoin exchanges also do not provide paperwork, accounting details, and financial disclosures that would normally apply to an investment. So, there are essentially zero legal remedies for illegal activity - this is boring fine print that simply restates what 209.149.113.5 said. The exchange operator can literally rob you, and you can't do much about it. As such, Bitcoin exchanges operate in the business of unregulated securities, which is legal-ese for "not legal, but the Government hasn't arrested the operators yet." Here's what the top American federal regulator has to say about investment rules.

Like any good capitalist, you can make your own mind up about how legal you wish to keep your investment activity. But if you think you can make a ton of fast money by handing your actual currency over to a bunch of ... nerds on the internet, you'd better brush up on the very first rule of acquisition honored by those very same internet nerds. Nimur (talk) 14:30, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Eventually compatible currencies will be able to be exchanged directly via "atomic swaps" without an exchange in the middle. 185.230.100.66 (talk) 15:42, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If the answer to this question was easy to provide, speculation on such currencies would cease. That ain't gunna happen. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HiLo48 (talk • contribs) 11:56, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nobody considers a fad to be a fad when they are in the middle of it. 209.149.113.5 (talk) 13:54, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Where Are the Autosaves with Windows 10?[edit]

My Windows 10 desktop computer apparently either had a power glitch or some sort of a transient failure while I was asleep, and I lost the Word documents and Excel documents that I was working on. Some of the autorecovery versions are available for me. At least one of them seems to be lost, but I assume that it is out there in the directory where Word saves its autorecovery files every 10 minutes. Can someone tell me what the file path is? I know that I start at the C: drive. Is it then in C:\Windows, or C:\ProgramData, and then where down in the chain?

Thank you in advance. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:50, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I see that in the past there has been a directory structure of AppData\Roaming\Microsoft\Office, and then subdirectories in which the saves are stored. But what parent directory is AppData in? Robert McClenon (talk) 00:25, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

AppData is in your user directory so, C:\Users\RobertMcClenon or whatever. The %APPDATA% environmental variable should lead to the roaming directory for the current user in many contexts. Nil Einne (talk) 08:18, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]