I see many here championing this behavior with hows-it-feel and shoes-on-the-other-foot excuses to justify it, reminding everyone how it used to be back in the day when recruiters and employers wouldn't bother to notify you that you didn't get the job.
I have three words to address this.
The Golden Rule.
This is entirely a matter of professionalism and respect.
I don’t see many claiming that employers and recruiters have cleaned up their act since back in the day. Employers still refuse to observe the Golden Rule when dealing with applicants (and employees).
So to hell with them, right? Right?
Employers have ratings and reputations to consider too, when they lowball salaries
, make unreasonable demands and expect to treat their employees like property.
Clearly you have failed to grasp the entire principle of the Golden Rule. Treat others how you would like to be treated.
If you like being treated like shit then by all means continue to shovel that shit back in their direction. After a few weeks or months of using this tactic, you'll probably hear Dr. Phil's voice whispering in your ear as you stare into your mirror one morning, asking how that attitude is "working out for you."
And yes, employers have a responsibility to treat their employees right as well. If they don't, they'll quickly find out how that's "working out" for them too. If the job market is anywhere near as good as they advertise, then shitty employers will watch their best employees walk. They will change their attitude when they realize they need to change. It certainly won't be you that will convince them.
At the end of the day, applicants need to realize they're never holding all the cards, and a shitty attitude isn't going to "beat" the system.
There are real tangible benefits to running a private email server if you are looking for more privacy for your email.
Very true, but today's generation gets really offended when you ask them to pay for services like email and social media. It's against their religion or something.
That is, unless you are in a government job.
I dunno about that. Seems to have worked out just fine for Hillary Clinton. Got away with doing exactly that for years.
How does it stop someone from taking a photo of your displayed e-mail with another device? Even if it somehow stops me taking a screenshot, there's no way from keeping me from taking a shot of the screen...
Uh, I hate to point out the obvious here, but there's not a single end-to-end encryption solution in the world that would prevent this, so it's rather difficult to classify this as mere "theater" without slapping that label on every other form of email encryption.
I see many here championing this behavior with hows-it-feel and shoes-on-the-other-foot excuses to justify it, reminding everyone how it used to be back in the day when recruiters and employers wouldn't bother to notify you that you didn't get the job.
I have three words to address this.
The Golden Rule.
This is entirely a matter of professionalism and respect. Act like a child with some kind of vindictive excuse to justify it, and you'll be treated like a child. If the snowflake generation keeps this up, they're going to find themselves on the wrong side of the technology they adore so much when LinkedIn starts a 5-star rating system to rate the potential job applicant pool . The habitual ghosters will be quickly identified, and will deserve every bit of their blacklisting. Good luck with that 1-start resume of yours. You're gonna need it.
Drunk people stumbling around at 2AM in a hotel hallway is something that rarely happens? People leave the door cracked because someone ran down to the ice machine, or is expecting a visitor? I can think of many reasons and scenarios where I've seen and left doors purposely cracked regardless of they automatically shut and lock. Hell, I've used the lock to prevent the door from shutting. Yes, it can and does happen.
And my entire point here was centered around an overreaction to the "crime" of walking in the wrong door. You can't really idiot-proof a gun; that requires a capable and rational mind behind the trigger. Shit happens. Respond logically, especially when someone's life is on the line.
First of all, your objection pertains to a FAR different scenario than the one I described. "Drunk people stumbling around" is not at all the same as "an armed man UNLOCKS YOUR DOOR and enters it without either announcing himself or knocking."
Nor does it take into account that the occupant of the room is both female and en dishabillement.
In my experience, it's impossible usefully to discuss a topic when there's no agreement about the definition of terms and conditions that will frame the discussion.
You don't understand? I answered your question. We're discussing a hotel, and the fact that you think it's somehow impossible for anyone to accidentally enter the wrong hotel room, and your excuse is "door locks". My point was no technology is fool-proof when humans are involved. None.
And please try and keep YOUR scenario realistic. We're talking about hotel employees doing security checks here. If an intruder is ARMED and enters a hotel room (locked or unlocked), they have intent to do harm. That is NOT the same as any accidental or unannounced intrusion by an employee or anyone else who made a simple mistake or is there doing a specific job function.
Nonetheless, my point regarding Nevada law on justifiable homicide stands. If the actual woman who was intruded upon by a non-theoretical hotel dick had been armed and had chosen to fire on him, there is every reasons to believe that she would not have been guilty of any crime in the state of Nevada.
I cited Nevada statutes on the subject, and limited my discussion to the cover they would have lent her, had she chosen to respond with deadly force. By contrast, you proposed a scenario that bears no resemblance to the real-world incident outlined in TFS, above, then tried to change the topic to the morality of firing on an unarmed drunk who pushes through a UNLOCKED door.
My unarmed drunk is guilty of doing the same damn thing as any other person entering the wrong door, locked or unlocked; they made a mistake. And the argument that attempts to justify ANY intrusion with an armed response is exactly why Stand Your Ground laws are being questioned. I fully believe in the right to arm and defend yourself and understand the value of not being forced to retreat in every situation, but at the end of the day you still should have to prove that you felt your life was threatened in order to justify ANY deadly response. Otherwise, shit happens, and innocent people get killed.
As far as state statues protecting a unjust decision, good luck convincing 12 jurors at the civil trial (brought forth by the innocent victims family) that you were justified in killing someone because you were in a "state of undress".
You know, I hate to point out the obvious here, but someone who happens to enter a room unannounced may have also made a simple mistake. Not everyone who opens a door to find someone naked inside is automatically a "creeper" wanting to do harm, and plenty of people have been shot and killed by mistake, unfortunately including parents mistaking their own children for an intruder.
Mmm - no.
I don't know how many hotel rooms you've stayed in recently, but, in every single one I've occupied, the door LOCKS automatically when you shut it. If a stranger with a gun on his hip enters your room, it is only because he first UNLOCKED your door to do so.
You'd have to explain to me how that happens accidentally. Because it doesn't...
Drunk people stumbling around at 2AM in a hotel hallway is something that rarely happens? People leave the door cracked because someone ran down to the ice machine, or is expecting a visitor? I can think of many reasons and scenarios where I've seen and left doors purposely cracked regardless of they automatically shut and lock. Hell, I've used the lock to prevent the door from shutting. Yes, it can and does happen.
And my entire point here was centered around an overreaction to the "crime" of walking in the wrong door. You can't really idiot-proof a gun; that requires a capable and rational mind behind the trigger. Shit happens. Respond logically, especially when someone's life is on the line.
Oh, so they regularly call CEOs of not-so-important companies to sit for days of Congressional testimony?
Believe me I wish Fuckbook didn't have the Vulcan Idiot Grip hold on the ignorant masses, but it does. Hell, that fucking platform was the epicenter of political conspiracy for the last election. Says a lot when you're competing against Russia on that kind of shit.
If it starts to dip because no one wants to be subjected to this shit, the venue will soon be changed.
You're talking about the crowd who has endured 120-degree heat sitting in makeshift rooftop tents to attend technical talks.
Something tells me it's gonna take a lot more than this to keep the kids away from What-Happens-Here-Stays-Here, USA. Call it tradition at this point.
You know, kind of like the stupidity of hosting DEFCON in the desert during the hottest time of the year. Needless to say, some things will likely never change.
Entering a hotel room (Private Space) while a woman is in a state of undress, is creeper shit, and he DESERVED a bullet. What if it was a naked 10 year old and he pulled that entering unannounced BS? You Leftists are fukked in the head. Buncha pervs and pedo supporters. Pathetic.
You know, I hate to point out the obvious here, but someone who happens to enter a room unannounced may have also made a simple mistake. Not everyone who opens a door to find someone naked inside is automatically a "creeper" wanting to do harm, and plenty of people have been shot and killed by mistake, unfortunately including parents mistaking their own children for an intruder.
Think twice before threatening someone's life for the petty crime of being embarrassed, and hope someone gives you that same courtesy.
"In a 2013 study, the World Wide Fund for Nature identified the world's 10 most dangerous waters for shipping, but the Bermuda Triangle was not among them."
When it comes to measuring the most dangerous waters for shipping, does the human element of piracy tend to blow other hazards out of the proverbial water?
The ease of hacking, the lack of accountability due to several paperless models, the "technical failures", the stacked up judges at multiple levels to ensure that any complaints will be in favor of turning red... All of these are no less part of the GOP playbook than disenfranchisement and extreme gerrymandering.
So, there was never a single democrat that voted for electronic voting machines. This was always a republican idea, right?
Hate to point out the obvious, but finding shit security on a new electronic device isn't something you can logically pin on politics. We find all manner of devices to be easily hackable every single day, and no vendor is immune.
Why not just count paper ballots like Canada does? Each precinct tallies up their counts and reports them upstream where they are aggregated. The manual counts are supervised by representatives from each party. Publish all of the counts and subtotals so they can be verified. Even if there are a 100 million ballots to count, by distributing the work, it can still be done in a timely manner.
An EU court ruled that taking an existing invention and hot-gluing a clock on the side does not count as a totally new invention.
Uh, clock you say?
Try not drown in the Unholy Flood of Irony, but you essentially just described how we ended up with millions of iHumans walking around with SIM-enabled smartphones on their wrist.
You might recognize the hardware I'm talking about. Looks an awful lot like an existing invention that includes some hard-coding work to put a clock emoji on the side...
Real fines. In this case, $ Billions. Only a couple would work.
You're delusional if you think that pittance would do anything.
Oh, and either ban from spectrum auctions or, even better, surcharge their winning bid by 50%.
Again, you assume they care about a paltry surcharge after winning at auction. They have hundreds of millions of customers. All they have to do is add $1 to every customer bill and call it a "spectrum protection fee" or some such bullshit. Any auction surcharge will be paid for within months, and would deliver pure profit (read: executive bonuses) after that. That ROI is easily justified to a Board you're about to make even richer.
And no, Verizon customers won't cancel their service over a $1 surcharge. When it comes down to it, they might bitch for a day or two but won't actually do jack shit. Consumers are lazy, and mega-corps know it.
Of course all this Lifeline and Universal Service stuff ought to go, but rural service is a fundamentally less lucrative market. this will lead incumbents to fight off competition with the available tools, fraudulent claims being an easy one. I'm almost surprised this was caught.
I'm holding my surprise to add to my shock when being "caught" actually results in something being done other than laughable fines. As it stands right now, mega-corps don't care about being caught. Verizon probably calculated getting caught vs. the revenue secured in falsely stated markets and the gains associated with marketing the "best" LTE coverage and figured out getting caught is worth it. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if another wireless provider pulled this exact same shit after this, ]because they'll know it's worth the risk.
Here's the fucking icing on the Irony cake; Wanna know what would actually happen if the FCC actually hit Verizon with a fine large enough for them to actually feel it?
Verizon would claim they're Too Big To Fail, and ask for a government bailout, on the taxpayers dime.
Really? I'm gonna bet that would be a complete waste of life. If you get a response at all it's going to be a mix of dissembling and "fuck you, prole, you have no rights" boilerplate.
I learned a long time ago that the most powerful word in the world is why.
It's particularly useful when used as a question and asked repeatedly without accepting bullshit answers like "we've always done it this way." Tends to highlight stupid excuses people have for not wanting to change or expend any effort into troubleshooting.
And quite honestly, a company 401(k) contribution policy should not be a hard document for a company to produce in order to help explain the GP's issues. That should take essentially zero effort beyond a phone call or email to HR.
Yes, it is a problem. My wife has a work iPhone (Lightning) and a personal Android phone (still with Micro-USB as it is a bit older). I have a new Android phone with USB-C. Our car supports Android Auto and Apple CarPlay. But depending on who is driving (and in the case of my wife which phone she is using), we need to unplug the connector cable, and select the correct one to use. It's just an unnecessary PITA. Looking forward to USB-C for all phones and laptops. You can even charge a laptop with the 18 W phone charger, it just takes a lot longer.
"Yes, it is a problem."
Yes, I agree. And based on this usage profile, it's a problem for 0.01% of society.
Sorry, but I guess I find it irritating that THIS problem is the kind of shit that gets the attention of regulators. Not blatant price fixing and collusion in the industry. Not bullshit surcharges added with little or no justification. Not "unlimited" data plans that are anything but. Not the millions we've paid these providers to expand their infrastructure so we're not the bandwidth laughing stock of the world (which they pocketed instead)
Hell, this entire problem centers around e-waste, and yet we can't even get regulators to address the very real problem of capitalistic greed enabling the arrogant behavior of purposely making consumer electronics disposable after 12 months. Addressing that problem would do FAR more to curb e-waste than any argument about connector standards.
Then perhaps they should pull their head out of their ass and address the REAL problem; Greedy manufacturers making hardware that is designed to prematurely fail in order to bolster revenue.
Start forcing vendors to make hardware that lasts 5 - 10 years instead of the disposable crap they offer today. That would do FAR more to combat the e-waste problem.
EU regulators plan to study whether there is a need for action in the push for a common mobile phone charger following a lack of progress by phone makers towards this goal...
I guess we hire teenagers as EU regulators these days? Apparently none of them recall what the mobile charger landscape looked like not long ago when every damn manufacturer had some proprietary bullshit power connector and oddball voltage requirement. Believe me a LOT of progress has been made to narrow down that field in the last 10 - 15 years.
iPhone and Android users have long complained about using different chargers for their phones.
Guess I'm not really buying this crap either. People are usually die hard fans of one brand or the other. And with the charger/interface market now essentially being narrowed down to two connectors, it's not exactly a difficult task to find the correct power charger that can be plugged in damn near any USB interface that provides power. They even make hybrid cables with both connectors on them as an all-in-one solution.
Furthermore, those degrees usually do not teach you that, what needs to be done in whatever position.
They DO tell the employer that you are a) able to learn new things in this ever-changing field and b) finish what you have started.
Uh, no, they don't tell an employer either one of those things. They certainly don't guarantee them.
First off, I find the whole "finish what you have started" validation to be ridiculous and very outdated. I work with plenty of skilled professionals who lack a degree that finish what they start every day. Just because a sprinter has never completed a marathon doesn't automatically mean they're some lazy half-assed athlete, and yet that is exactly what is implied when we attempt to pre judge those who have skills, but lack a degree.
And as far as a degree telling an employer about your ability to learn new things, a 20-year old IT degree is almost worthless today from a technical perspective, and it tells me nothing of someone's ability to learn NEW things in an ever-changing field. A degree only tells me you were capable at some point, not that you are still capable. I will only learn that through direct observation and experience.
Institutions breed arrogance. "...the very nature of academic degrees are designed to give graduates the ability to argue one's superiority with authority. "
Maybe that was the "very nature" of degrees from Trump University, but normally the nature and purpose of academic degrees (a.k.a. higher education) is to give graduates the ability to argue one's educated opinion with knowledge and/or experience.
And besides, modern society proved long ago you don't even need a high school diploma to give someone the ability to "argue one's superiority with authority." Take a look at any online forum ever created for evidence of that.
"but it's far more likely that those who actually get off their ass and use a sauna are not the kind of lazy obese people that die of heart and lung diseases due to an inactive lifestyle."
How is using a sauna an active person only thing? Your assumption seems obsurd to me. To use one all you literally have to do is sit down for an extended period.
No, in order to actually use a sauna, one has to likely expend some effort to obtain an education or technical skill, and establish a decent paying job to afford a personal sauna or regular sauna service. One also has to get motivated enough to move somewhere other than a couch, a toilet, or a kitchen. You also have to change into bathing suit or undress, and then sit down in a rather extreme environment and try not to fall asleep or pass out for an extended period of time.
Sad to say, but extremely lazy are not going to expend even that level of effort every day.
And while the activity of using a sauna is not always associated with exercise, it is often used in conjunction with exercise, which would be another key variable to include in statistical analysis.
a sauna stresses the system and is essentially a kind of exercise, a style of exercise you're going to have trouble finding elsewhere.
Or it might be the exact opposite :
Sauna stresses the system, and thus only people with a functional enough cardio-vascular system go there.
The people with bad hearths don't go there AND die younger.
Exactly this.
At first I read the statistics being presented here as potential evidence that saunas have a considerable health benefit, but it's far more likely that those who actually get off their ass and use a sauna are not the kind of lazy obese people that die of heart and lung diseases due to an inactive lifestyle.
And yeah, I hate when statistics often showcase nothing more than water-is-wet common sense. It's like saying that 99% of professional ballerinas are not obese, so ballet is now "statistically proven" to be one of the greatest solutions in the world to combat obesity.
Slashdot Mirror
Geekmux doesn't understand the difference between this and general IP encryption? Wow.
", there's no way from keeping me from taking a shot of the screen..."
I was talking about the specific vulnerability identified.
Read and comprehend next time, moron.
I see many here championing this behavior with hows-it-feel and shoes-on-the-other-foot excuses to justify it, reminding everyone how it used to be back in the day when recruiters and employers wouldn't bother to notify you that you didn't get the job.
I have three words to address this.
The Golden Rule.
This is entirely a matter of professionalism and respect.
I don’t see many claiming that employers and recruiters have cleaned up their act since back in the day. Employers still refuse to observe the Golden Rule when dealing with applicants (and employees).
So to hell with them, right? Right?
Employers have ratings and reputations to consider too, when they lowball salaries , make unreasonable demands and expect to treat their employees like property.
Clearly you have failed to grasp the entire principle of the Golden Rule. Treat others how you would like to be treated.
If you like being treated like shit then by all means continue to shovel that shit back in their direction. After a few weeks or months of using this tactic, you'll probably hear Dr. Phil's voice whispering in your ear as you stare into your mirror one morning, asking how that attitude is "working out for you."
And yes, employers have a responsibility to treat their employees right as well. If they don't, they'll quickly find out how that's "working out" for them too. If the job market is anywhere near as good as they advertise, then shitty employers will watch their best employees walk. They will change their attitude when they realize they need to change. It certainly won't be you that will convince them.
At the end of the day, applicants need to realize they're never holding all the cards, and a shitty attitude isn't going to "beat" the system.
There are real tangible benefits to running a private email server if you are looking for more privacy for your email.
Very true, but today's generation gets really offended when you ask them to pay for services like email and social media. It's against their religion or something.
That is, unless you are in a government job.
I dunno about that. Seems to have worked out just fine for Hillary Clinton. Got away with doing exactly that for years.
How does it stop someone from taking a photo of your displayed e-mail with another device? Even if it somehow stops me taking a screenshot, there's no way from keeping me from taking a shot of the screen...
Uh, I hate to point out the obvious here, but there's not a single end-to-end encryption solution in the world that would prevent this, so it's rather difficult to classify this as mere "theater" without slapping that label on every other form of email encryption.
I see many here championing this behavior with hows-it-feel and shoes-on-the-other-foot excuses to justify it, reminding everyone how it used to be back in the day when recruiters and employers wouldn't bother to notify you that you didn't get the job.
I have three words to address this.
The Golden Rule.
This is entirely a matter of professionalism and respect. Act like a child with some kind of vindictive excuse to justify it, and you'll be treated like a child. If the snowflake generation keeps this up, they're going to find themselves on the wrong side of the technology they adore so much when LinkedIn starts a 5-star rating system to rate the potential job applicant pool . The habitual ghosters will be quickly identified, and will deserve every bit of their blacklisting. Good luck with that 1-start resume of yours. You're gonna need it.
geekmux insisted:
Drunk people stumbling around at 2AM in a hotel hallway is something that rarely happens? People leave the door cracked because someone ran down to the ice machine, or is expecting a visitor? I can think of many reasons and scenarios where I've seen and left doors purposely cracked regardless of they automatically shut and lock. Hell, I've used the lock to prevent the door from shutting. Yes, it can and does happen.
And my entire point here was centered around an overreaction to the "crime" of walking in the wrong door. You can't really idiot-proof a gun; that requires a capable and rational mind behind the trigger. Shit happens. Respond logically, especially when someone's life is on the line.
First of all, your objection pertains to a FAR different scenario than the one I described. "Drunk people stumbling around" is not at all the same as "an armed man UNLOCKS YOUR DOOR and enters it without either announcing himself or knocking."
Nor does it take into account that the occupant of the room is both female and en dishabillement.
In my experience, it's impossible usefully to discuss a topic when there's no agreement about the definition of terms and conditions that will frame the discussion.
You don't understand? I answered your question. We're discussing a hotel, and the fact that you think it's somehow impossible for anyone to accidentally enter the wrong hotel room, and your excuse is "door locks". My point was no technology is fool-proof when humans are involved. None.
And please try and keep YOUR scenario realistic. We're talking about hotel employees doing security checks here. If an intruder is ARMED and enters a hotel room (locked or unlocked), they have intent to do harm. That is NOT the same as any accidental or unannounced intrusion by an employee or anyone else who made a simple mistake or is there doing a specific job function.
Nonetheless, my point regarding Nevada law on justifiable homicide stands. If the actual woman who was intruded upon by a non-theoretical hotel dick had been armed and had chosen to fire on him, there is every reasons to believe that she would not have been guilty of any crime in the state of Nevada.
I cited Nevada statutes on the subject, and limited my discussion to the cover they would have lent her, had she chosen to respond with deadly force. By contrast, you proposed a scenario that bears no resemblance to the real-world incident outlined in TFS, above, then tried to change the topic to the morality of firing on an unarmed drunk who pushes through a UNLOCKED door.
My unarmed drunk is guilty of doing the same damn thing as any other person entering the wrong door, locked or unlocked; they made a mistake. And the argument that attempts to justify ANY intrusion with an armed response is exactly why Stand Your Ground laws are being questioned. I fully believe in the right to arm and defend yourself and understand the value of not being forced to retreat in every situation, but at the end of the day you still should have to prove that you felt your life was threatened in order to justify ANY deadly response. Otherwise, shit happens, and innocent people get killed.
As far as state statues protecting a unjust decision, good luck convincing 12 jurors at the civil trial (brought forth by the innocent victims family) that you were justified in killing someone because you were in a "state of undress".
geekmux pointed out:
You know, I hate to point out the obvious here, but someone who happens to enter a room unannounced may have also made a simple mistake. Not everyone who opens a door to find someone naked inside is automatically a "creeper" wanting to do harm, and plenty of people have been shot and killed by mistake, unfortunately including parents mistaking their own children for an intruder.
Mmm - no.
I don't know how many hotel rooms you've stayed in recently, but, in every single one I've occupied, the door LOCKS automatically when you shut it. If a stranger with a gun on his hip enters your room, it is only because he first UNLOCKED your door to do so.
You'd have to explain to me how that happens accidentally. Because it doesn't ...
Drunk people stumbling around at 2AM in a hotel hallway is something that rarely happens? People leave the door cracked because someone ran down to the ice machine, or is expecting a visitor? I can think of many reasons and scenarios where I've seen and left doors purposely cracked regardless of they automatically shut and lock. Hell, I've used the lock to prevent the door from shutting. Yes, it can and does happen.
And my entire point here was centered around an overreaction to the "crime" of walking in the wrong door. You can't really idiot-proof a gun; that requires a capable and rational mind behind the trigger. Shit happens. Respond logically, especially when someone's life is on the line.
"It's not important."
Oh, so they regularly call CEOs of not-so-important companies to sit for days of Congressional testimony?
Believe me I wish Fuckbook didn't have the Vulcan Idiot Grip hold on the ignorant masses, but it does. Hell, that fucking platform was the epicenter of political conspiracy for the last election. Says a lot when you're competing against Russia on that kind of shit.
If it starts to dip because no one wants to be subjected to this shit, the venue will soon be changed.
You're talking about the crowd who has endured 120-degree heat sitting in makeshift rooftop tents to attend technical talks.
Something tells me it's gonna take a lot more than this to keep the kids away from What-Happens-Here-Stays-Here, USA. Call it tradition at this point. You know, kind of like the stupidity of hosting DEFCON in the desert during the hottest time of the year. Needless to say, some things will likely never change.
Entering a hotel room (Private Space) while a woman is in a state of undress, is creeper shit, and he DESERVED a bullet. What if it was a naked 10 year old and he pulled that entering unannounced BS? You Leftists are fukked in the head. Buncha pervs and pedo supporters. Pathetic.
You know, I hate to point out the obvious here, but someone who happens to enter a room unannounced may have also made a simple mistake. Not everyone who opens a door to find someone naked inside is automatically a "creeper" wanting to do harm, and plenty of people have been shot and killed by mistake, unfortunately including parents mistaking their own children for an intruder.
Think twice before threatening someone's life for the petty crime of being embarrassed, and hope someone gives you that same courtesy.
"In a 2013 study, the World Wide Fund for Nature identified the world's 10 most dangerous waters for shipping, but the Bermuda Triangle was not among them."
When it comes to measuring the most dangerous waters for shipping, does the human element of piracy tend to blow other hazards out of the proverbial water?
Criminal fraud charges for the executives who submitted the maps. 5-10 in federal prison is a powerful disincentive.
The day that happens is the day Executive Fall Guy becomes an officially recognized profession.
No one important is going to jail. That's a job for the plebs.
The ease of hacking, the lack of accountability due to several paperless models, the "technical failures", the stacked up judges at multiple levels to ensure that any complaints will be in favor of turning red... All of these are no less part of the GOP playbook than disenfranchisement and extreme gerrymandering.
So, there was never a single democrat that voted for electronic voting machines. This was always a republican idea, right?
Hate to point out the obvious, but finding shit security on a new electronic device isn't something you can logically pin on politics. We find all manner of devices to be easily hackable every single day, and no vendor is immune.
Why not just count paper ballots like Canada does? Each precinct tallies up their counts and reports them upstream where they are aggregated. The manual counts are supervised by representatives from each party. Publish all of the counts and subtotals so they can be verified. Even if there are a 100 million ballots to count, by distributing the work, it can still be done in a timely manner.
Why do we not use paper you ask?
I have two words for you on that topic.
Hanging chads.
An EU court ruled that taking an existing invention and hot-gluing a clock on the side does not count as a totally new invention.
Uh, clock you say?
Try not drown in the Unholy Flood of Irony, but you essentially just described how we ended up with millions of iHumans walking around with SIM-enabled smartphones on their wrist.
You might recognize the hardware I'm talking about. Looks an awful lot like an existing invention that includes some hard-coding work to put a clock emoji on the side...
Real fines. In this case, $ Billions. Only a couple would work.
You're delusional if you think that pittance would do anything.
Oh, and either ban from spectrum auctions or, even better, surcharge their winning bid by 50%.
Again, you assume they care about a paltry surcharge after winning at auction. They have hundreds of millions of customers. All they have to do is add $1 to every customer bill and call it a "spectrum protection fee" or some such bullshit. Any auction surcharge will be paid for within months, and would deliver pure profit (read: executive bonuses) after that. That ROI is easily justified to a Board you're about to make even richer.
And no, Verizon customers won't cancel their service over a $1 surcharge. When it comes down to it, they might bitch for a day or two but won't actually do jack shit. Consumers are lazy, and mega-corps know it.
Of course all this Lifeline and Universal Service stuff ought to go, but rural service is a fundamentally less lucrative market. this will lead incumbents to fight off competition with the available tools, fraudulent claims being an easy one. I'm almost surprised this was caught.
I'm holding my surprise to add to my shock when being "caught" actually results in something being done other than laughable fines. As it stands right now, mega-corps don't care about being caught. Verizon probably calculated getting caught vs. the revenue secured in falsely stated markets and the gains associated with marketing the "best" LTE coverage and figured out getting caught is worth it. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if another wireless provider pulled this exact same shit after this, ]because they'll know it's worth the risk.
Here's the fucking icing on the Irony cake; Wanna know what would actually happen if the FCC actually hit Verizon with a fine large enough for them to actually feel it?
Verizon would claim they're Too Big To Fail, and ask for a government bailout, on the taxpayers dime.
Really? I'm gonna bet that would be a complete waste of life. If you get a response at all it's going to be a mix of dissembling and "fuck you, prole, you have no rights" boilerplate.
I learned a long time ago that the most powerful word in the world is why.
It's particularly useful when used as a question and asked repeatedly without accepting bullshit answers like "we've always done it this way." Tends to highlight stupid excuses people have for not wanting to change or expend any effort into troubleshooting.
And quite honestly, a company 401(k) contribution policy should not be a hard document for a company to produce in order to help explain the GP's issues. That should take essentially zero effort beyond a phone call or email to HR.
Yes, it is a problem. My wife has a work iPhone (Lightning) and a personal Android phone (still with Micro-USB as it is a bit older). I have a new Android phone with USB-C. Our car supports Android Auto and Apple CarPlay. But depending on who is driving (and in the case of my wife which phone she is using), we need to unplug the connector cable, and select the correct one to use. It's just an unnecessary PITA. Looking forward to USB-C for all phones and laptops. You can even charge a laptop with the 18 W phone charger, it just takes a lot longer.
"Yes, it is a problem."
Yes, I agree. And based on this usage profile, it's a problem for 0.01% of society.
Sorry, but I guess I find it irritating that THIS problem is the kind of shit that gets the attention of regulators. Not blatant price fixing and collusion in the industry. Not bullshit surcharges added with little or no justification. Not "unlimited" data plans that are anything but. Not the millions we've paid these providers to expand their infrastructure so we're not the bandwidth laughing stock of the world (which they pocketed instead)
Hell, this entire problem centers around e-waste, and yet we can't even get regulators to address the very real problem of capitalistic greed enabling the arrogant behavior of purposely making consumer electronics disposable after 12 months. Addressing that problem would do FAR more to curb e-waste than any argument about connector standards.
Because they're rightfully horrified by the massive piles of E-Waste gathering around the world.
Then perhaps they should pull their head out of their ass and address the REAL problem; Greedy manufacturers making hardware that is designed to prematurely fail in order to bolster revenue.
Start forcing vendors to make hardware that lasts 5 - 10 years instead of the disposable crap they offer today. That would do FAR more to combat the e-waste problem.
EU regulators plan to study whether there is a need for action in the push for a common mobile phone charger following a lack of progress by phone makers towards this goal...
I guess we hire teenagers as EU regulators these days? Apparently none of them recall what the mobile charger landscape looked like not long ago when every damn manufacturer had some proprietary bullshit power connector and oddball voltage requirement. Believe me a LOT of progress has been made to narrow down that field in the last 10 - 15 years.
iPhone and Android users have long complained about using different chargers for their phones.
Guess I'm not really buying this crap either. People are usually die hard fans of one brand or the other. And with the charger/interface market now essentially being narrowed down to two connectors, it's not exactly a difficult task to find the correct power charger that can be plugged in damn near any USB interface that provides power. They even make hybrid cables with both connectors on them as an all-in-one solution.
Furthermore, those degrees usually do not teach you that, what needs to be done in whatever position. They DO tell the employer that you are a) able to learn new things in this ever-changing field and b) finish what you have started.
Uh, no, they don't tell an employer either one of those things. They certainly don't guarantee them.
First off, I find the whole "finish what you have started" validation to be ridiculous and very outdated. I work with plenty of skilled professionals who lack a degree that finish what they start every day. Just because a sprinter has never completed a marathon doesn't automatically mean they're some lazy half-assed athlete, and yet that is exactly what is implied when we attempt to pre judge those who have skills, but lack a degree.
And as far as a degree telling an employer about your ability to learn new things, a 20-year old IT degree is almost worthless today from a technical perspective, and it tells me nothing of someone's ability to learn NEW things in an ever-changing field. A degree only tells me you were capable at some point, not that you are still capable. I will only learn that through direct observation and experience.
Institutions breed arrogance. "...the very nature of academic degrees are designed to give graduates the ability to argue one's superiority with authority. "
Maybe that was the "very nature" of degrees from Trump University, but normally the nature and purpose of academic degrees (a.k.a. higher education) is to give graduates the ability to argue one's educated opinion with knowledge and/or experience.
And besides, modern society proved long ago you don't even need a high school diploma to give someone the ability to "argue one's superiority with authority." Take a look at any online forum ever created for evidence of that.
"but it's far more likely that those who actually get off their ass and use a sauna are not the kind of lazy obese people that die of heart and lung diseases due to an inactive lifestyle."
How is using a sauna an active person only thing? Your assumption seems obsurd to me. To use one all you literally have to do is sit down for an extended period.
No, in order to actually use a sauna, one has to likely expend some effort to obtain an education or technical skill, and establish a decent paying job to afford a personal sauna or regular sauna service. One also has to get motivated enough to move somewhere other than a couch, a toilet, or a kitchen. You also have to change into bathing suit or undress, and then sit down in a rather extreme environment and try not to fall asleep or pass out for an extended period of time.
Sad to say, but extremely lazy are not going to expend even that level of effort every day.
And while the activity of using a sauna is not always associated with exercise, it is often used in conjunction with exercise, which would be another key variable to include in statistical analysis.
Are wireless headphones even safe?
Compared to the threat of getting a headphone cord wrapped around your neck? Yes, wireless headphones are safe.
The "threat" of strangulation by headphone has me visualizing a mash-up between IT Crowd and John Wick for some reason.
I mean c'mon, strangling evil hipsters by their old-fashioned cords would be one hell of a signature move for a super-nerd assassin...
a sauna stresses the system and is essentially a kind of exercise, a style of exercise you're going to have trouble finding elsewhere.
Or it might be the exact opposite : Sauna stresses the system, and thus only people with a functional enough cardio-vascular system go there.
The people with bad hearths don't go there AND die younger.
Exactly this.
At first I read the statistics being presented here as potential evidence that saunas have a considerable health benefit, but it's far more likely that those who actually get off their ass and use a sauna are not the kind of lazy obese people that die of heart and lung diseases due to an inactive lifestyle.
And yeah, I hate when statistics often showcase nothing more than water-is-wet common sense. It's like saying that 99% of professional ballerinas are not obese, so ballet is now "statistically proven" to be one of the greatest solutions in the world to combat obesity.