No, the apps aren't responding to pings (which they can do regardless of if they are running.) That's how they know they're uninstalled. The default "listen for background pings" behavior is off. Which usually means the app is uninstalled.
Apple still allows some control. It can show a distinct advertising ID to the app advertising to you and to the app you uninstalled, preventing this. And, it can let you disable push notifications, cause fuck that (literal) noise. (For 99.99% of apps at least).
People are objecting, but is it a bad code of conduct?
It's not bad. Rule 69 (ironic) is to "love the juniors". Which is a little offputting in the modern Catholic Church. But it's right after "respect the seniors" and is clearly trying to set up a mentor/mentee situation.
That said, there's a lot of pro-catholic theology in it that would be pretty offensive if it was explicitly added to a CoC. And it's anti-sexual harassment policy is "love chastity".
It's a really short read. 72 commands that are usually a sentence fragment.
I can't find the text
A public domain religious text? Let me help with that. Note, that's a link directly to chapter 4.
Well, the new vote would be inspired by the fact that "Leave" is a debacle and that none of the promised benefits are even on the table anymore - the British government dropped them as requests from their side.
Seriously, I'm amazed that anyone in Parliament either went along with Leave and hasn't walked it back already.
While that's true, another good solution is to spread out the responsibility. We have breathalyzers in bars and people make sure each other are good to drive. Because, while we expect people to monitor their drinking, we build support systems in case they make mistakes. We should have bosses/coworkers sending people home.
72% is a pretty high turnout... for the US. It's fairly standard in the UK. And turnout was a lot higher in England/Wales (pro-leave area) than in Scotland/Ireland (anti-leave area). Like, the differences between them was more than 10% in between England and Ireland. It makes sense. A non-binding vote where the vast majority of people all agree on remain had low turnout. Shocking!! A special election with no binding effect and it looks like overwhelmingly that you're winning? And you stay home?
And if you really believe it should be democratically determined, why hasn't there been a second vote?
If you get 150% overtime it's cheaper for the manager to have three people working 100% than two people 150% so it never becomes a lasting pattern
Salary is only about half the cost of an employee. It's signifcantly cheaper to work two people 60 hours a week than three people 40 hours a week... even if the 60 hours a week people are being paid for 70.
OpenHab feels like a failure. I went there, click on "Get Started", There was no option to buy branded (or even proven compatible) hardware. It was all about downloading/installing/configuring the server. Which I would be willing to do if that happened after I got some hardware on the way...
Bottom-line, if OpenHab wants to succeed, it at least has to be more consumer friendly. Enough that I get a call from a relative who has a pile of hardware at their house; hardware,they found and bought online I'm not saying they have to be able to set it up. But they have to be able to buy it.
But it does seem like they are Apple parts. They're third-party refurbed (which was known when they were purchased). But they were original Apple shells with different chemical cells.
Especially by cultivating Donald Trump to launder Russian money and repeatedly betray his country, Russia's use of uneducated racists to accomplish their political goals is their most brilliant scheme.
Fixed that for you.
In reality, the Russians target people of any political persuasion. They are trying to cause partisan divides. Now, they have been most successful with the "uneducated racist" camp, but they've been about half to one fifth as successful with a bunch of liberal groups.
And it's a pretty Amercia-centric point of view. They successfully invaded Crimea. They got Britain to start the dissolution of the EU.. They're propping up fascist states in Eastern Europe. And it's unclear how far reaching their expansion of influence into the Middle East will be.
You're assuming that the batteries are counterfits. If they were counterfeited in China, why bother adding the logo? Why doesn't the "used and recovered" battery story hold water? Or, given the e-Recyclling that used to take place, harvesting the cases from discarded laptops and replacing the cells.
In theory, any of the world's millions of professional or amateur mathematicians could have a stroke of inspiration tomorrow and publish a formula that unravels internet cryptography -- and most internet commerce with it.
Anyone smart enough to solve this problem is smart enough to do something other than publish the proof. Patriots will probably get a large payday for delivering it to their local intelligence service. Black hats can sell it on the dark web. White hats would warn about an impending publication and let everyone crash move to a new system first.
I mean, as a condition for some jobs or to work at some companies. And then all the services that assume you have a FB account. For instance, if you want to use Tinder, it requires a facebook account. And then all the companies that use FB's authentication instead of rolling their own....
According to the Supreme Court case Sullivan vs. NYT, it's really hard for a public company or public personality to win a libel case. You have to prove the reported acted with malice or knowledge they were false when they were reported. If they think it's true, that's good enough. So, any politician (for example) pretty much has the burden to prove intent to harm.
A private person has better protection according to Gertz vs. Robert Welch. Basically, the idea is that any public figure (or major corporation) can counteract false news (as Cook is) by presenting evidence. But that a private person has a much harder time getting a counternarrative out there.
Slashdot Mirror
No, the apps aren't responding to pings (which they can do regardless of if they are running.) That's how they know they're uninstalled. The default "listen for background pings" behavior is off. Which usually means the app is uninstalled.
Apple still allows some control. It can show a distinct advertising ID to the app advertising to you and to the app you uninstalled, preventing this. And, it can let you disable push notifications, cause fuck that (literal) noise. (For 99.99% of apps at least).
Chastity, yes. The other three, no. Not in the chapter. Although there is an admonishment against "useless words"
It's not bad. Rule 69 (ironic) is to "love the juniors". Which is a little offputting in the modern Catholic Church. But it's right after "respect the seniors" and is clearly trying to set up a mentor/mentee situation.
That said, there's a lot of pro-catholic theology in it that would be pretty offensive if it was explicitly added to a CoC. And it's anti-sexual harassment policy is "love chastity".
It's a really short read. 72 commands that are usually a sentence fragment.
A public domain religious text? Let me help with that. Note, that's a link directly to chapter 4.
http://www.gutenberg.org/files...
That's not true, at least not in any state I've ever lived in. Getting a driver's license on the other hand...
Again, what backwards ass state do you live in?
Well, one is a government id, and the other isn't (assuming it's a private school.)
Ummm... WTF are you talking about. Or rather, since you clearly don't know that prole is short for proletariat, learn more before you speak.
That's a curious way of writing "a decrease in effectiveness"
The 3% is cute. It's not uniformly distributed throughout the day. Maybe we'll only need 1/2x cars.
Well, the new vote would be inspired by the fact that "Leave" is a debacle and that none of the promised benefits are even on the table anymore - the British government dropped them as requests from their side.
Seriously, I'm amazed that anyone in Parliament either went along with Leave and hasn't walked it back already.
While that's true, another good solution is to spread out the responsibility. We have breathalyzers in bars and people make sure each other are good to drive. Because, while we expect people to monitor their drinking, we build support systems in case they make mistakes. We should have bosses/coworkers sending people home.
72% is a pretty high turnout... for the US. It's fairly standard in the UK. And turnout was a lot higher in England/Wales (pro-leave area) than in Scotland/Ireland (anti-leave area). Like, the differences between them was more than 10% in between England and Ireland. It makes sense. A non-binding vote where the vast majority of people all agree on remain had low turnout. Shocking!! A special election with no binding effect and it looks like overwhelmingly that you're winning? And you stay home?
And if you really believe it should be democratically determined, why hasn't there been a second vote?
It was a non-binding poll with a response rate that was pretty poor and almost equal votes. That doesn't really scream "act on me" to me.
Salary is only about half the cost of an employee. It's signifcantly cheaper to work two people 60 hours a week than three people 40 hours a week... even if the 60 hours a week people are being paid for 70.
The ability to detect you're burning out is one of the first losses of cognitive ability when you're burning out.
OpenHab feels like a failure. I went there, click on "Get Started", There was no option to buy branded (or even proven compatible) hardware. It was all about downloading/installing/configuring the server. Which I would be willing to do if that happened after I got some hardware on the way...
Bottom-line, if OpenHab wants to succeed, it at least has to be more consumer friendly. Enough that I get a call from a relative who has a pile of hardware at their house; hardware ,they found and bought online I'm not saying they have to be able to set it up. But they have to be able to buy it.
GP said "avoid manufacturers that do things like that." My response was a "I guess I have to build my own laptop". Because, they all do.
Fixed that for you.
In reality, the Russians target people of any political persuasion. They are trying to cause partisan divides. Now, they have been most successful with the "uneducated racist" camp, but they've been about half to one fifth as successful with a bunch of liberal groups.
And it's a pretty Amercia-centric point of view. They successfully invaded Crimea. They got Britain to start the dissolution of the EU.. They're propping up fascist states in Eastern Europe. And it's unclear how far reaching their expansion of influence into the Middle East will be.
You're assuming that the batteries are counterfits. If they were counterfeited in China, why bother adding the logo? Why doesn't the "used and recovered" battery story hold water? Or, given the e-Recyclling that used to take place, harvesting the cases from discarded laptops and replacing the cells.
The summary says:
Anyone smart enough to solve this problem is smart enough to do something other than publish the proof. Patriots will probably get a large payday for delivering it to their local intelligence service. Black hats can sell it on the dark web. White hats would warn about an impending publication and let everyone crash move to a new system first.
You're right. I'll avoid computer companies that do this.
Of course, that means I guess I'm sourcing the batteries, motherboard, screen, etc. all separately.
I mean, as a condition for some jobs or to work at some companies. And then all the services that assume you have a FB account. For instance, if you want to use Tinder, it requires a facebook account. And then all the companies that use FB's authentication instead of rolling their own....
So, NAT is too expensive/complex to get right, but Tor is fine?
To prevent this, you could just have the protection lasted as long as the product was being sold/supported by the company.
According to the Supreme Court case Sullivan vs. NYT, it's really hard for a public company or public personality to win a libel case. You have to prove the reported acted with malice or knowledge they were false when they were reported. If they think it's true, that's good enough. So, any politician (for example) pretty much has the burden to prove intent to harm.
A private person has better protection according to Gertz vs. Robert Welch. Basically, the idea is that any public figure (or major corporation) can counteract false news (as Cook is) by presenting evidence. But that a private person has a much harder time getting a counternarrative out there.