"...you get Alzheimer's. If you use artificial sweetener you get dementia. Either way you're fucked."
Just get Stevia, it's not sugar and also not artificial.
Sweet.
It's sweet, until the Sugar Mafia steps in and provides "irrefutable" evidence through many "sponsored" studies that proves Stevia causes smartphone addiction and IBS.
Wouldn't the energy cost of the portion of the obesity epidemic attributable to the sedimentary lifestyle subtract from this? I didn't see any consideration of that though it would be tough to untangle.
Perhaps you could start by estimating what portion of the million plus deaths directly and indirectly attributable to obesity could be prevented with a less sedimentary lifestyle, total up the entire health industry's energy bill, figure out what fraction of the health industry's business is attributable to those illnesses, and multiply the energy bill by that fraction.
If we weighed the impact of one of our largest health issues against damn near anything, the end result would likely invalidate the original study. How many of "those" illnesses are you going to attribute to a sedimentary lifestyle? Heart disease? Diabetes? Cancer? There are a number of our top killers in society that are certainly exacerbated by sitting on your ass all day every day.
When I was allowed to work from home, it saved me two hours every day in commute time. I took one hour of that time and dedicated it to exercise, and gave the extra hour back to my company. It was a win-win for all involved. People either give a shit about their health, or they don't.
All military personnel must enable the "Privacy" mode on all portable electronic devices when out of CONUS. Because those privacy modes are disabled by default.
I'm gonna take a wild guess that you've never actually served in the Armed Forces. If you did, you would realize this would never work.
The problem isn't the law, it is lawyers and judges. The law is fine. (Some) Lawyers and Judges are known to bend over backwards to present and form opinions that aren't actually based on anything reasonable. To the point of ridiculousness.
If (some) Lawyers and Judges are able to abuse the law in this way (to the point of ridiculousness), then the problem does in fact lie with the law. Change it, so bullshit like this cannot perpetuate, no matter what lawyer stands in front of what judge. In this case, perhaps something as simple as a statute of limitations applicable to specific situations to establish a time limit on how long it can be drug out could be established.
The problem with your assertion is we wish Twitter were regulated down to nothing more than public masturbatory narcissism. Unfortunately, a lot of morons look to social media as a source of news and facts, which is why many are concerned with a certain (cough, POTUS, cough) Twitter account being damn near capable of starting a war.
Erm, according to the plaintiff's sorry excuse for a blog, the legal counsel has pledged to continue until they are disbarred or they make a "success" of the case, whatever that means.
Although IANAL, perhaps we should talk about exactly what that means.
At this point, is legal counsel even representing those of the long-defunct SCO corp? Other than these idiots taking some kind of blood oath to ride this case all the way to Hell and back, I'm failing to see how there's a point to continuing this. And by that, I mean even a legal point that any judge would give a shit about.
If anything, this case serves as a prime example of laws that likely need to be changed. You know, like a law that threatens disbarring those in the legal community for repeatedly regurgitating zombie cases.
Because the location isn't sensitive. These bases aren't hidden, they are fortified forward operating positions.
What is inside the base is sensitive, what information there is sensitive, what force composition is there is sensitive.
Yes, which you can start to discern the sensitive information once you start getting more pieces of the puzzle. How many people work there, day/night movements, shift change times, supply routes, etc.
Long ago, the military used to be concerned about these things we called Essential Elements of Friendly Information (EEFIs). Gather enough of them together, and you can start to figure out very sensitive or classified information. EEFI was later called "Critical Information". I guess now that includes "anonymized" data that comes from a fitness app. I sure as shit hope the innocence gets lost real quick around data mining like this.
Malwarebytes is closed source software. It could literally be doing anything to your system. You have no control over it, or what it does. So you basically are trusting some corporation.
Uh, I'm afraid your point was completely lost due to the fact that the people who need Malwarebytes aren't running FOSS.
... I'm OK with it. My concern is that the publishers and "music catalog owners" will get an overwhelmingly large share of the money, leaving only cookie crumbs to the songwriters and artists.
One could be fairly ambiguous with the title "artist", but songwriter I would hope would be pretty damn specific from a legal perspective, and focus the rewards on those who actually deserve it.
Itâ(TM)s time we fire up the first Soylent Green factory.
Those angry men are more likely to put you in the meat grinder than the opposite.
Those angry old men are rather ignorant and stuck in their ways, much like the societal reward system.
Progress with no benefit to society as a whole is pointless.
Oh, but there IS a point to all of this. Just ask the owners of companies embracing autonomous/AI solutions. Greed is once again getting rewarded by the "employee" who never complains about minimum wage, getting sick, or at risk of creating a sexual harassment issue (that last one adopted for 2018). Believe me, the rich will be rewarded.
Science and technology is supposed to service us, not the other way around.
Most humans are wasting 40 - 60 hours a week doing a job that automation/AI will soon come along and do. The "service" would be to create a utopia where humans can do whatever they want to do in life, not merely accept what they can do, and turn it into a shitty lifetime of servitude.
Science and technology can deliver. The question is can a society hell-bent on greed adapt.
From TFS: "Preventing reasonable diagnostic or repair functions includes permanently affixing a battery in a manner that makes it difficult or impossible to remove."
There is some ambiguity, but the intent seems pretty obvious.
Uh, no it's not, and this won't change a damn thing. Using the term "independent repair provider" even dictates that repairs will still not be something an end-user is authorized or allowed to do, and implies that consumers will still have to pay someone to change out a battery. No one "repairs" a battery, they get replaced, which is all consumers are asking for. We used to have removable batteries. Greed infected design, and now we do not.
Enough of the ambiguity. Enough of the bullshit. Word it in black and white terms. Electronic devices with rechargeable batteries should be designed in such a way that they are easily replaceable by the end user. See? It's not hard to remove the ambiguity and put a stop to relentless greed that continues to fuck over the consumer.
Of course it can. Software installations? There's an app for that. Web design? Fill-in-the-blank template. Communication? Tweet-filled emojis. Research? Ask Siri.
We seem to overlook the side effect of dumbing down devices to create an idiot-proof UI for the masses; most users are not tech saavy because they don't need to be.
It makes sense to devolve the computing environment.
Can't believe this isn't illegal. This is like a gas station charging red cars 10 cents more per gallon.
No it's not. An insurance company's costs are tied to risk. Higher risk customers cost them more. So either they run the numbers and charge people based on their risk, or they don't run the numbers and charge everyone equivalently and the low-risk people are subsidizing the high-risk people. They've run the numbers, and it's come out that Hotmail users are higher risk.
Oh, they've run the numbers? Nothing like hiring your own auditor. They are using hundreds of metrics, and yet an email address is suddenly deemed a valid one? This opens up an endless rabbit hole of relentless greed. Their parent company touts a 48% increase of revenue over the last 5 years raking in over 7 billion, so let's stop bullshitting about costs as if they're hurting. This isn't about charging certain customers less; this is about gouging customers for more.
How far are you willing to let them go to tie your wallet to their risk? If they determined that sexual orientation was a risk factor, should they be allowed to charge more for the LGBTQ+ crowd? How about eye color? DNA screening? Discrimination, or merely risk mitigation?
A gas station's costs are in no way tied to the colour of a car, and would be no basis upon which to charge different prices.
And from what I can tell, there is no basis to use an email address either, but hey let's just keep accepting revenue-generating metrics from the insurance overlords conveyed under the guise that they're trying to "save" the good customers from the bad. After all, Greed is known to be reasonable and self-limiting.
Could there be a lot of Hotmail users, who have been thrown through the windshield from an accident, that have been found still clutching their phones with a half finished email?
If that's the case, then I don't have any issues with them getting higher insurance rates.
They claim they use hundreds of metrics to determine insurance rates. Just how far down that rabbit hole are you willing to allow them to go in order to justify gouging the consumer? Sexual orientation? Eye color? DNA sampling?
We are talking about teenagers, they seek popularity and social approval as part of their growing up process, just as we did when we were their age.
Seeking popularity and social approval among a finite group of peers within a localized social circle defined the challenges of yesteryear. That social "circle" is now called Social Media, where teenagers are competing for popularity and approval with millions of other teenagers, including a lot of rich spoiled teens who consider Pleb Mocking a part-time job.
Needless to say the challenge isn't the same as it used to be, and like YouTube monetizing minimums, the bar keeps getting raised higher and higher every day. Today it's filming suicide victims and chomping on Tide Pods. I cringe to think what's next to push someone to that plateau of viral popularity.
Well, that can't really be the case, we had our share of rich idiots that we were supposedly admiring, at least if TV shows of my youth are any indicator. I didn't quite get it, but apparently there was a reasonable amount of people interested in the houses and lives of people who are rich to create whole TV series around that format.
Yes, and now we have 10,000 of those "series" being vlogged to a billion people that were never exposed to it before.
Robin Leach wasn't rubbing in champagne wishes and caviar dreams every hour of every day around the entire planet either. Much like Superbowl advertising, volume matters.
Complaining that programming code is "too geeky" is like complaining that a steamroller is "too flatty".
We have enough issues and vulnerabilities being generated today by the "geeks" who have the mental capacity and intelligence to code.
The last thing software security and integrity needs is coding dumbed down to the point where Cletus T. Dipshit is at the programming helm of next-gen solutions.
Excuse me, but I've had a smartphone way earlier than 2007.
Sure, some of us had smartphones prior to 2007.
And we have no idea how our company was able to afford the smart part of it, since smashing the "WWW" button meant being charged an ungodly rate per MB.
Slashdot Mirror
Horray for Apple!
I detest the continuous introduction of useless and stupid bells and whistles and new "features" being pushed on me.
Instead, they want to fix problems and make the machine run better? I'm all for it.
They may be working on some improvements to their quality program, but make no mistake as to who Apple is beholden to; Greed.
Shareholders will demand they continue to release hardware with pointless features if it so much as hints to generating more revenue.
And you, the consumer, no longer matter. Profit matters, which explains the last few years of pointless features that no one asked for.
"...you get Alzheimer's. If you use artificial sweetener you get dementia. Either way you're fucked."
Just get Stevia, it's not sugar and also not artificial. Sweet.
It's sweet, until the Sugar Mafia steps in and provides "irrefutable" evidence through many "sponsored" studies that proves Stevia causes smartphone addiction and IBS.
Never put anything past Greed.
Wouldn't the energy cost of the portion of the obesity epidemic attributable to the sedimentary lifestyle subtract from this? I didn't see any consideration of that though it would be tough to untangle.
Perhaps you could start by estimating what portion of the million plus deaths directly and indirectly attributable to obesity could be prevented with a less sedimentary lifestyle, total up the entire health industry's energy bill, figure out what fraction of the health industry's business is attributable to those illnesses, and multiply the energy bill by that fraction.
If we weighed the impact of one of our largest health issues against damn near anything, the end result would likely invalidate the original study. How many of "those" illnesses are you going to attribute to a sedimentary lifestyle? Heart disease? Diabetes? Cancer? There are a number of our top killers in society that are certainly exacerbated by sitting on your ass all day every day.
When I was allowed to work from home, it saved me two hours every day in commute time. I took one hour of that time and dedicated it to exercise, and gave the extra hour back to my company. It was a win-win for all involved. People either give a shit about their health, or they don't.
All military personnel must enable the "Privacy" mode on all portable electronic devices when out of CONUS. Because those privacy modes are disabled by default.
I'm gonna take a wild guess that you've never actually served in the Armed Forces. If you did, you would realize this would never work.
The problem isn't the law, it is lawyers and judges. The law is fine. (Some) Lawyers and Judges are known to bend over backwards to present and form opinions that aren't actually based on anything reasonable. To the point of ridiculousness.
If (some) Lawyers and Judges are able to abuse the law in this way (to the point of ridiculousness), then the problem does in fact lie with the law. Change it, so bullshit like this cannot perpetuate, no matter what lawyer stands in front of what judge. In this case, perhaps something as simple as a statute of limitations applicable to specific situations to establish a time limit on how long it can be drug out could be established.
... is a depressing rabbit hole.
I recommend we don't scrape the slime off.
Let it fester in a vacuum.
It's public masturbatory narcissism.
The problem with your assertion is we wish Twitter were regulated down to nothing more than public masturbatory narcissism. Unfortunately, a lot of morons look to social media as a source of news and facts, which is why many are concerned with a certain (cough, POTUS, cough) Twitter account being damn near capable of starting a war.
Erm, according to the plaintiff's sorry excuse for a blog, the legal counsel has pledged to continue until they are disbarred or they make a "success" of the case, whatever that means.
Although IANAL, perhaps we should talk about exactly what that means.
At this point, is legal counsel even representing those of the long-defunct SCO corp? Other than these idiots taking some kind of blood oath to ride this case all the way to Hell and back, I'm failing to see how there's a point to continuing this. And by that, I mean even a legal point that any judge would give a shit about.
If anything, this case serves as a prime example of laws that likely need to be changed. You know, like a law that threatens disbarring those in the legal community for repeatedly regurgitating zombie cases.
Because the location isn't sensitive. These bases aren't hidden, they are fortified forward operating positions.
What is inside the base is sensitive, what information there is sensitive, what force composition is there is sensitive.
Yes, which you can start to discern the sensitive information once you start getting more pieces of the puzzle. How many people work there, day/night movements, shift change times, supply routes, etc.
Long ago, the military used to be concerned about these things we called Essential Elements of Friendly Information (EEFIs). Gather enough of them together, and you can start to figure out very sensitive or classified information. EEFI was later called "Critical Information". I guess now that includes "anonymized" data that comes from a fitness app. I sure as shit hope the innocence gets lost real quick around data mining like this.
Malwarebytes is closed source software. It could literally be doing anything to your system. You have no control over it, or what it does. So you basically are trusting some corporation.
Uh, I'm afraid your point was completely lost due to the fact that the people who need Malwarebytes aren't running FOSS.
That also includes the OS.
... I'm OK with it. My concern is that the publishers and "music catalog owners" will get an overwhelmingly large share of the money, leaving only cookie crumbs to the songwriters and artists.
One could be fairly ambiguous with the title "artist", but songwriter I would hope would be pretty damn specific from a legal perspective, and focus the rewards on those who actually deserve it.
Itâ(TM)s time we fire up the first Soylent Green factory.
Those angry men are more likely to put you in the meat grinder than the opposite.
Those angry old men are rather ignorant and stuck in their ways, much like the societal reward system.
Progress with no benefit to society as a whole is pointless.
Oh, but there IS a point to all of this. Just ask the owners of companies embracing autonomous/AI solutions. Greed is once again getting rewarded by the "employee" who never complains about minimum wage, getting sick, or at risk of creating a sexual harassment issue (that last one adopted for 2018). Believe me, the rich will be rewarded.
Science and technology is supposed to service us, not the other way around.
Most humans are wasting 40 - 60 hours a week doing a job that automation/AI will soon come along and do. The "service" would be to create a utopia where humans can do whatever they want to do in life, not merely accept what they can do, and turn it into a shitty lifetime of servitude.
Science and technology can deliver. The question is can a society hell-bent on greed adapt.
"No one "repairs" a battery"
Bullshit. I repair lead-acid car batteries all the time.
I wasn't talking about lead-acid batteries. I wasn't even talking about EV battery replacement.
We both know what this bill is targeting, which is where 90% of the problem lies; handheld electronic devices.
From TFS: "Preventing reasonable diagnostic or repair functions includes permanently affixing a battery in a manner that makes it difficult or impossible to remove."
There is some ambiguity, but the intent seems pretty obvious.
Uh, no it's not, and this won't change a damn thing. Using the term "independent repair provider" even dictates that repairs will still not be something an end-user is authorized or allowed to do, and implies that consumers will still have to pay someone to change out a battery. No one "repairs" a battery, they get replaced, which is all consumers are asking for. We used to have removable batteries. Greed infected design, and now we do not.
Enough of the ambiguity. Enough of the bullshit. Word it in black and white terms. Electronic devices with rechargeable batteries should be designed in such a way that they are easily replaceable by the end user. See? It's not hard to remove the ambiguity and put a stop to relentless greed that continues to fuck over the consumer.
"The clock is now two minutes to midnight."
Iron Maiden has been waiting for this sponsorship opportunity for a long damn time.
Time to elect Eddie to Head up the position of Doomsday Czar.
Is an iPad not a computer?
It's nothing but verbiage semantics for GenZ marketing. The Millennial version is "what's a mainframe?"...
"Can an iPad replace your computer?"
Of course it can. Software installations? There's an app for that. Web design? Fill-in-the-blank template. Communication? Tweet-filled emojis. Research? Ask Siri.
We seem to overlook the side effect of dumbing down devices to create an idiot-proof UI for the masses; most users are not tech saavy because they don't need to be.
It makes sense to devolve the computing environment.
Shill detected
This made me laugh and realize we need a browser plug-in for this...
Can't believe this isn't illegal. This is like a gas station charging red cars 10 cents more per gallon.
No it's not. An insurance company's costs are tied to risk. Higher risk customers cost them more. So either they run the numbers and charge people based on their risk, or they don't run the numbers and charge everyone equivalently and the low-risk people are subsidizing the high-risk people. They've run the numbers, and it's come out that Hotmail users are higher risk.
Oh, they've run the numbers? Nothing like hiring your own auditor. They are using hundreds of metrics, and yet an email address is suddenly deemed a valid one? This opens up an endless rabbit hole of relentless greed. Their parent company touts a 48% increase of revenue over the last 5 years raking in over 7 billion, so let's stop bullshitting about costs as if they're hurting. This isn't about charging certain customers less; this is about gouging customers for more.
How far are you willing to let them go to tie your wallet to their risk? If they determined that sexual orientation was a risk factor, should they be allowed to charge more for the LGBTQ+ crowd? How about eye color? DNA screening? Discrimination, or merely risk mitigation?
A gas station's costs are in no way tied to the colour of a car, and would be no basis upon which to charge different prices.
And from what I can tell, there is no basis to use an email address either, but hey let's just keep accepting revenue-generating metrics from the insurance overlords conveyed under the guise that they're trying to "save" the good customers from the bad. After all, Greed is known to be reasonable and self-limiting.
Could there be a lot of Hotmail users, who have been thrown through the windshield from an accident, that have been found still clutching their phones with a half finished email?
If that's the case, then I don't have any issues with them getting higher insurance rates.
They claim they use hundreds of metrics to determine insurance rates. Just how far down that rabbit hole are you willing to allow them to go in order to justify gouging the consumer? Sexual orientation? Eye color? DNA sampling?
"Admiral said that hundreds of factors were used by underwriters in setting car insurance..."
Apparently hundreds wasn't enough to avoid fucking over customers with an email address.
Time to go see if FuckYouAdmiral.com is available, for email correspondence of course.
Can't believe this isn't illegal. This is like a gas station charging red cars 10 cents more per gallon.
Courage
You misspelled Investors.
The screaming stupidity of any asinine idea can be drowned out with the sound of thunderous revenue. - Greed
We are talking about teenagers, they seek popularity and social approval as part of their growing up process, just as we did when we were their age.
Seeking popularity and social approval among a finite group of peers within a localized social circle defined the challenges of yesteryear. That social "circle" is now called Social Media, where teenagers are competing for popularity and approval with millions of other teenagers, including a lot of rich spoiled teens who consider Pleb Mocking a part-time job.
Needless to say the challenge isn't the same as it used to be, and like YouTube monetizing minimums, the bar keeps getting raised higher and higher every day. Today it's filming suicide victims and chomping on Tide Pods. I cringe to think what's next to push someone to that plateau of viral popularity.
Well, that can't really be the case, we had our share of rich idiots that we were supposedly admiring, at least if TV shows of my youth are any indicator. I didn't quite get it, but apparently there was a reasonable amount of people interested in the houses and lives of people who are rich to create whole TV series around that format.
Yes, and now we have 10,000 of those "series" being vlogged to a billion people that were never exposed to it before.
Robin Leach wasn't rubbing in champagne wishes and caviar dreams every hour of every day around the entire planet either. Much like Superbowl advertising, volume matters.
Complaining that programming code is "too geeky" is like complaining that a steamroller is "too flatty".
We have enough issues and vulnerabilities being generated today by the "geeks" who have the mental capacity and intelligence to code.
The last thing software security and integrity needs is coding dumbed down to the point where Cletus T. Dipshit is at the programming helm of next-gen solutions.
"the 2007 introduction of the smartphone"
Excuse me, but I've had a smartphone way earlier than 2007.
Sure, some of us had smartphones prior to 2007.
And we have no idea how our company was able to afford the smart part of it, since smashing the "WWW" button meant being charged an ungodly rate per MB.