It's not like they actively did so. It's simply an online backup
An online backup tool - that they willingly installed - did the transfer. Anyone that uses such programs should really keep in mind what such a program does.
Granted, cloud-backup providers are acting irresponsibly in failing to express the risks of using their system.
blaming the victims is just wrong
Indeed, but that doesn't mean it's wrong to say the victims failed to take sensible basic steps to protect themselves.
Except you don't need to store the videos indefinitely. I imagine a couple of months is long enough. It's a pretty huge amount of data, but I'm sure it's not that hard to cope with a couple of petabytes of simple video files. That's on the order of a thousand hard-disks full (not counting redundancy), and there's no fancy database requirements here, just a huge pile of videos indexed by car ID and day.
Anyway, I don't think peragrin was saying anything to the contrary, but was instead just suggesting IA could act as the 'tape library'.
Maybe there should be strict penalties for losing video recordings as well.
One can also view it as a problem with how the system works. The car cam, and proper treatment of its tapes, shouldn't be the responsibility of the officers in the car.
If there were a designated 'cam tape librarian' for the department, and that person alone were allowed to manage the tapes, this stuff would presumably be much less of a problem. (Naturally, if tapes go missing, that should be enough to put the tape librarian's job on the line, and the don't screw with the tapes unless it's your job to rule would have to have teeth.)
The vegans though are the ones who are saying man shouldn't eat meat at all.
You appear to think it's self-evident that they are wrong. It's not. Ideas of morality vary.
Anyway, you're generalising and confusing the terms vegetarian and vegan. If someone eats hunted meat, they don't strictly qualify as a vegetarian. Not that this semantic line of discussion will be enlightening, of course, nor does it have any bearing on the soundness of their moral stance whether a certain word applies.
And veganism is completely unnatural and artificial for humans.
It is fortunate, then, that vegans aren't claiming otherwise.
There's a difference between denying the diet of our evolutionary ancestors, and having a problem with the way animals are treated in modern farms. I'm surprised by how often I have to point this out.
For gaming, right? I imagine things might speed up a little now we have a new generation of consoles. On the other hand, as graphics get better and better, game dev costs skyrocket, so perhaps we really are seeing a ceiling.
(No matter how many times I encounter it, the flagrant mis-attribution in your sig still annoys me.)
It's a tempting point, but not strictly relevant. The histories of other religions neither vindicate, nor worsen the standing of, Islam. Far better to emphasise that most modern Muslims in western countries are peaceable.
(Regrettably, this is not also true of, say, the average Afghan Muslim.)
Well, it's pretty clearly negligence in this case. The officer might not have deliberately intended to kill the cyclist, but it's certainly the officer's fault that the cyclist is dead. I'm not sure I really get your point.
Slashdot Mirror
It's not like they actively did so. It's simply an online backup
An online backup tool - that they willingly installed - did the transfer. Anyone that uses such programs should really keep in mind what such a program does.
Granted, cloud-backup providers are acting irresponsibly in failing to express the risks of using their system.
blaming the victims is just wrong
Indeed, but that doesn't mean it's wrong to say the victims failed to take sensible basic steps to protect themselves.
You may as well put it on YuoTube if you are going to put it anywhere with / via the Internet.
Might as well take the locks off our doors while we're at it - they're not perfect, after all.
Anyway, who says they'll be connected to the Internet?
It's certainly subjectively good.
I disagree ;-P
I presume you are a troll. Convince me otherwise, and I will explain to you why this is a stupid suggestion.
Except you don't need to store the videos indefinitely. I imagine a couple of months is long enough. It's a pretty huge amount of data, but I'm sure it's not that hard to cope with a couple of petabytes of simple video files. That's on the order of a thousand hard-disks full (not counting redundancy), and there's no fancy database requirements here, just a huge pile of videos indexed by car ID and day.
Anyway, I don't think peragrin was saying anything to the contrary, but was instead just suggesting IA could act as the 'tape library'.
Maybe there should be strict penalties for losing video recordings as well.
One can also view it as a problem with how the system works. The car cam, and proper treatment of its tapes, shouldn't be the responsibility of the officers in the car.
If there were a designated 'cam tape librarian' for the department, and that person alone were allowed to manage the tapes, this stuff would presumably be much less of a problem. (Naturally, if tapes go missing, that should be enough to put the tape librarian's job on the line, and the don't screw with the tapes unless it's your job to rule would have to have teeth.)
His dentist suggested he not do it any more.
It took a dentist to tell him that?
For me it was the biggest reason for noscript.
Flashblock, surely?
Makes me think: is auto-playing HTML5 video a possibility? If so, can this easily be disabled in browsers' settings?
Let the arms race continue!
I'll have a go: the Eighteenth.
It was never meant to be set in stone. It was meant to be honored, however.
The vegans though are the ones who are saying man shouldn't eat meat at all.
You appear to think it's self-evident that they are wrong. It's not. Ideas of morality vary.
Anyway, you're generalising and confusing the terms vegetarian and vegan. If someone eats hunted meat, they don't strictly qualify as a vegetarian. Not that this semantic line of discussion will be enlightening, of course, nor does it have any bearing on the soundness of their moral stance whether a certain word applies.
Tell me about it. Large rocks are so much tastier.
And veganism is completely unnatural and artificial for humans.
It is fortunate, then, that vegans aren't claiming otherwise.
There's a difference between denying the diet of our evolutionary ancestors, and having a problem with the way animals are treated in modern farms. I'm surprised by how often I have to point this out.
Either the entity initiating the send, or some kind of proxy along the way.
It's how the internet works.
Please explain how it's a legitimate concern and how to alleviate it.
Just because it's how the Internet works, doesn't mean it might not be a problem. There's a tin-foil hat brigade who use VPNs, after all.
Crypto analogy: the Internet works in plain-text. That doesn't mean plain-text is always appropriate.
They've published detailed guidelines on this for years
Yes. What's new is the Most Common part.
not hard if you get in and sit there to slowly change to something malicious.
Compelling point; I've not seen this mentioned before.
For gaming, right? I imagine things might speed up a little now we have a new generation of consoles. On the other hand, as graphics get better and better, game dev costs skyrocket, so perhaps we really are seeing a ceiling.
(No matter how many times I encounter it, the flagrant mis-attribution in your sig still annoys me.)
and Microsoft bleeding it's monopoly to those tied into it.
What?
A low fad lifestyle, strictly speaking.
What little free time I have I get to spend with my family, and generally, having a life. Please leave the basement once in a while.
You missed posting on Slashdot as an AC. Did that one not make you feel superior?
Are Mastercard paying for the privilege?
It's a tempting point, but not strictly relevant. The histories of other religions neither vindicate, nor worsen the standing of, Islam. Far better to emphasise that most modern Muslims in western countries are peaceable.
(Regrettably, this is not also true of, say, the average Afghan Muslim.)
Well, it's pretty clearly negligence in this case. The officer might not have deliberately intended to kill the cyclist, but it's certainly the officer's fault that the cyclist is dead. I'm not sure I really get your point.
Fairly sure Chrome doesn't phone-home these details to Google. Maybe it does if you 'sign-in in Chrome', but I never saw the point in that.