You're assuming that self-driving cars are a form of progress. A lot of people oppose them, for privacy, security and financial reasons. For instance, how many years of normal deaths are going to be made up in the first hacking of 1 million cars on the road? Of 100 million? How are you going to like renting rides from a company that sells your data as opposed to owning a car.
Not only that, but when they prepaid several billion more than they needed to (thanks to complying to changing rules forcing different payment schedules) they not only don't get the money back, but they cannot even apply those as prepayments to the pension fund. That money may as well have not existed.
Clearly the only difference between the companies is whether they bought Sun. I mean, they both produce databases, and query databases as their primary business. Now, Oracle does it as a middleware, and Google does databases of tracking, ads and searches (in that order) which it then provides as a service, but it's the same thing. Computery-stuff is all interchangable. That's why I have web designers write all my C code for embedded devices.
Most people are probably aware that data they directly give to Facebook -- such as "liking" a Page or updating their relationship status -- may be sold to advertisers
It's not sold to advertisers... Facebook is an advertiser. Don't allow this bullshit "Facebook only helps the advertisers" meme stand. Make Facebook own their shit.
Also, they're never going to sell data on you, cause renting it is far more profitable.
Mostly, we don't want to tax people a whole hell of a lot (which will inevitably end up taxing the middle class, although the rich get higher taxes as well), so we want to leave the rich to fend for themselves.
Seems pretty penny-wise, pound-foolish. For one, there are very few rich kids compared to poor/middle class kids. Second, I think pretty much all the various "benefits if you make less than X" introduce a lot of paperwork and errors that are solved by just taxing rich people more and giving it to everyone. There's a reason UBI is so compelling compared to welfare.
e want to do something like provide free access to two- or four-year college for everyone with less than $100,000/year of income (good luck with that: Donald Trump Jr. just has to move out of his dad's house when he turns 18, get a small apartment paid ahead by his father, and have daddy not claim him as a dependent so he can take free college; how do we write the legal language?)
Why is it so important not to pay for Don Jr.? Cause that seems to make things much harder.
Corporate proxies used that to set policies like "leave my employee's banking and healthcare traffic alone, inspect everything else".
That sounds like a perfectly reasonable corporate policy. You're not worried about data exfiltrating via the health or banking sites. And employees expect some privacy there (certainly with a corporate health plan, there needs to be firewalls in place). So why wouldn't you intercept all but a few sites?
College debt is the hardest debt to discharge in bankruptcy. If you're taking a highly speculative position at that point in your life, you're better off running up credit card debt. Either you can pay it off with interest, or you have a bankruptcy before you graduate. Neither will result in 30-year-old you screwed cause of a bad bet.
Most likely reason is that it's more expensive to maintain two different SKUs/product lines than just to pay for the extra cameras. Same reason why older laptops used to be sold without ethernet... except the electronics were all there, just covered by plastic.
Why do you think they won't just order you to use your finger to unlock the phone when alive? Police are already adept at physically forcing you to do things.
The dead will not resist that caps use its fingerprints to unlock their phone...
Nor will the living. At least not successfully. The cops already will just hold your finger on the scanner if you refuse to do it when they tell you (and then charge you with obstruction.)
He doesn't think the earth is flat. He thinks he wanted to ride a homemade rocket. He tried other funding sources before suddenly deciding that the earth must be flat and getting flat-earthers to sponsor his toy.
The Microsoft Surface did a good job merging laptop and tablet, in that I've seen people comfortably use it both ways for real work and for play. NB: It's mostly artists, who love the ability to draw on the screen.
It has nothing to do with envy or bragging. It has to do with making sure that your less aggressive peers are being paid fairly (or, if you're the less aggressive one, you are.)
Yes, the assertion is 2 million people use a hacked spotify app. You have to be intentionally illiterate to be unable to read "Spotify Says[:] 2 Million Users Hacked Apps To Suppress Ads On Its Free Service "
And that number makes sense, in that only 1 person has to write the ad-skipping app for 2 million to install it.
Slashdot Mirror
And they take online classes how?
You're assuming that self-driving cars are a form of progress. A lot of people oppose them, for privacy, security and financial reasons. For instance, how many years of normal deaths are going to be made up in the first hacking of 1 million cars on the road? Of 100 million? How are you going to like renting rides from a company that sells your data as opposed to owning a car.
Not only that, but when they prepaid several billion more than they needed to (thanks to complying to changing rules forcing different payment schedules) they not only don't get the money back, but they cannot even apply those as prepayments to the pension fund. That money may as well have not existed.
I look forward to Google's and Facebook's shadow profiles getting significantly better.
Clearly the only difference between the companies is whether they bought Sun. I mean, they both produce databases, and query databases as their primary business. Now, Oracle does it as a middleware, and Google does databases of tracking, ads and searches (in that order) which it then provides as a service, but it's the same thing. Computery-stuff is all interchangable. That's why I have web designers write all my C code for embedded devices.
It's not sold to advertisers... Facebook is an advertiser. Don't allow this bullshit "Facebook only helps the advertisers" meme stand. Make Facebook own their shit.
Also, they're never going to sell data on you, cause renting it is far more profitable.
Seems pretty penny-wise, pound-foolish. For one, there are very few rich kids compared to poor/middle class kids. Second, I think pretty much all the various "benefits if you make less than X" introduce a lot of paperwork and errors that are solved by just taxing rich people more and giving it to everyone. There's a reason UBI is so compelling compared to welfare.
Why is it so important not to pay for Don Jr.? Cause that seems to make things much harder.
That sounds like a perfectly reasonable corporate policy. You're not worried about data exfiltrating via the health or banking sites. And employees expect some privacy there (certainly with a corporate health plan, there needs to be firewalls in place). So why wouldn't you intercept all but a few sites?
College debt is the hardest debt to discharge in bankruptcy. If you're taking a highly speculative position at that point in your life, you're better off running up credit card debt. Either you can pay it off with interest, or you have a bankruptcy before you graduate. Neither will result in 30-year-old you screwed cause of a bad bet.
How does this prevent me from MITM with self-signed certs that your computer is set to accept via corporate policy?
Also, what's wrong with MITM in that case? Corporations controlling what their computers can do makes perfect sense to me.
Most likely reason is that it's more expensive to maintain two different SKUs/product lines than just to pay for the extra cameras. Same reason why older laptops used to be sold without ethernet... except the electronics were all there, just covered by plastic.
Why do you think they won't just order you to use your finger to unlock the phone when alive? Police are already adept at physically forcing you to do things.
Nor will the living. At least not successfully. The cops already will just hold your finger on the scanner if you refuse to do it when they tell you (and then charge you with obstruction.)
He doesn't think the earth is flat. He thinks he wanted to ride a homemade rocket. He tried other funding sources before suddenly deciding that the earth must be flat and getting flat-earthers to sponsor his toy.
The Microsoft Surface did a good job merging laptop and tablet, in that I've seen people comfortably use it both ways for real work and for play. NB: It's mostly artists, who love the ability to draw on the screen.
It has nothing to do with envy or bragging. It has to do with making sure that your less aggressive peers are being paid fairly (or, if you're the less aggressive one, you are.)
The person who offered X $$$$ and Y $$. If they cannot justify it, it's a negotiation skill thing.
So, either get your evenings defined as normal work hours, or do code reviews for OSS projects. Seems easy to understand to me.
Yes, the assertion is 2 million people use a hacked spotify app. You have to be intentionally illiterate to be unable to read "Spotify Says[:] 2 Million Users Hacked Apps To Suppress Ads On Its Free Service "
And that number makes sense, in that only 1 person has to write the ad-skipping app for 2 million to install it.
No problem. Same lack of a </sarcasm> tag was a mistake I made last week.
So, to understand, Uber should be allowed to kill people so they can develop technology that only they have access to?
And what's the range on gravity again?
I mean, wikipedia has the math that GPS uses to combine more than four satellites to get a better result. So, that's obviously a thing.
GPS is really complex, and simple geometry doesn't generate good instincts w. regard to GPS limitations.
GPS isn't based on bearing...