Why should I have to? Our society has accepted codes of behavior, if I don't lock my door, you're still a thief if you break in and take my stuff even if it was trivial to do.
"Well sadly the world doesn't give a fuck what you want. That's the world you DO live in."
No it's not. This is why Google is in trouble for collecting more data then they needed and why the police isn't allowed to scan your house with infrared.
"Here's an interesting one... by this logic - if radiowaves you broadcast for all to pick up are not public... well you must apply it to sound waves to. So the next time I want to blast metallica at 500DB at 3am - when the neighbours call the cops to complain. I'll say "I was playing the music for myself with a reasonable expectation of privacy and they had NO right to be listening so instead of hassling me go arrest them for spying on me"... yeah THAT will work..."
Imagine your Boss came to you and said "We're having 10 programmers make the same program, but we'll only pay one of you". That means that 9 of them end up working for free. That's why they hate that business model, no serious graphics designer can make a living out of such contests.
The problem was that they recorded a lot more information then they needed. Google may not have been malicious in their intent but they still need to be stopped because if we don't draw the line here, what prevents an actually malicious company from driving around vacuuming up all your data?
What certain geeks like you seem to fail to understand is that normal people don't give a flying fuck about how it works on a technical level.
What a normal reasonable person expects from an open wi-fi is that their neighbors might borrow their internet. What they don't expect is that a random asswank will record all their data. While it's very easy to do it does require you to go out of your way to do it which means you're a dick.
In the same way when you sunbathe in your backyard or fuck your girlfriend in the window you probably don't mind if your neighbors see you, but you have every right to be pissed if someone decides to take photographs.
I for one don't want to live in a world where any information that leaves the 4 walls of my house is public.
They're seriously comparing phones that lose signal with a standard grip to phones where hold the phone with both hands deliberately trying to cover the antenna and pretend the result is somehow meaningful?
Wouldn't a sane signal comparison compare them using reasonably common grips? It's sorta stupid to say "When you deliberately cover both antennas with an awkward two hand grip it'll lose 10 dBm", everyone knows the antenna will lose signal if you cover it, the point is that the iPhone is so easy to cover by accident.
I agree, I was just trying to make the point that the government is mostly doing a decent job at protecting your rights in general even though corporations are generally favored in the civil law system due to their superior resources.
I'm definitely against the IP owners trying to push the investigation duty to other parties, my opinion is that they should focus on combating commercial infringement and leave consumers the heck alone.
That's the entire reason we have government. The most basic service that government provides is protection, when that service is not provided then you get anarchy and your rights quickly become "none whatsoever". Just look at post-invasion Bagdad or post-hurricane New Orleans.
The reason I said that the government provides your rights is because ultimately they're the only ones that can enforce them, what would be the alternatives, pay the corporations to do it? I'm sure they'd be honest, vigilante justice? that works GREAT.
Sure it's to some extent problematic since some of the rights we expect to be enforced is the freedom from the government, but that's why we have to hold the government accountable. However I'll maintain that thinking that the government is not enforcing any of your rights is profoundly ignorant.
Well, they do make horrendously massive use of recaps, footage recycling and fillers. If you removed all the fillers and recaps then barely half the show would remain.
I agree. Generally when sensible people try to prove global warming they point towards more long term things such as the glaciers melting (Which takes a really long time).
Humans in general seems to have a huge issue with the whole data vs anecdote problem, if they spot an outlier they desperately cling onto it and try to claim it's a trend.
Right, if you think western civilization is so horrible why don't you move to africa where they don't have any rights and have to deal with real feudal warlords?
The truth of the matter is that the state is providing you with more rights then you can count, you're just too spoiled to notice.
When you press the big shiny button that says "If you press this big shiny button your name will be posted to the internets" then you've forsworn the protection of that piece of personal information. ESRB will only care if the company in question publishes the information without making so explicit to the user.
As far as I know a number of banks offer virtualised credit cards with a specified limit and expiration date. If you generate those cards with the exact amount of money your transaction is worth then the card is useless their database gets hacked.
The median(the middlemost number) would be 1,1,1,1,[2],3,3,4,5
Re:More corporate BS
on
The End of Free
·
· Score: 5, Informative
Information wants to be free generally refers to libre, not gratis. The basic definition is that it's prohibitively difficult to keep things secret as technology progresses.
It's called Global Warming because the averages temperature rises. But that doesn't mean it only leads to more warmth all of the time, the climate changes also lead to more unstable weather overall which means that sometimes yes it'll be colder then normal.
It's so annoying when ignorant people spout "ZOMG, it's snowing, that means global warming is a sham!!!", get a clue about how climate works before spouting out nonsense.
Slashdot Mirror
Why should I have to? Our society has accepted codes of behavior, if I don't lock my door, you're still a thief if you break in and take my stuff even if it was trivial to do.
"Well sadly the world doesn't give a fuck what you want. That's the world you DO live in."
No it's not. This is why Google is in trouble for collecting more data then they needed and why the police isn't allowed to scan your house with infrared.
"Here's an interesting one... by this logic - if radiowaves you broadcast for all to pick up are not public... well you must apply it to sound waves to. So the next time I want to blast metallica at 500DB at 3am - when the neighbours call the cops to complain. I'll say "I was playing the music for myself with a reasonable expectation of privacy and they had NO right to be listening so instead of hassling me go arrest them for spying on me"... yeah THAT will work..."
Are you drunk? That didn't even make sense.
Well, since standard blueray is 50gb and it says this one is 25x bigger then the standard one should be 1250gb.
Though at that point I have to wonder, why don't you just sell the movies on a bloody external harddrive?
No, it's more like this.
Imagine your Boss came to you and said "We're having 10 programmers make the same program, but we'll only pay one of you". That means that 9 of them end up working for free. That's why they hate that business model, no serious graphics designer can make a living out of such contests.
"What certain people do understand is the difference between a real argument and an ad-hominem one."
That wouldn't be you. This is an ad-hominem argument
"You're a moron, thus I don't need to refute you"
This is an opinion
"People that invade others privacy are dicks and asswanks"
Now go back to your corner and stop using words you don't understand.
The problem was that they recorded a lot more information then they needed. Google may not have been malicious in their intent but they still need to be stopped because if we don't draw the line here, what prevents an actually malicious company from driving around vacuuming up all your data?
What certain geeks like you seem to fail to understand is that normal people don't give a flying fuck about how it works on a technical level.
What a normal reasonable person expects from an open wi-fi is that their neighbors might borrow their internet. What they don't expect is that a random asswank will record all their data. While it's very easy to do it does require you to go out of your way to do it which means you're a dick.
In the same way when you sunbathe in your backyard or fuck your girlfriend in the window you probably don't mind if your neighbors see you, but you have every right to be pissed if someone decides to take photographs.
I for one don't want to live in a world where any information that leaves the 4 walls of my house is public.
They're seriously comparing phones that lose signal with a standard grip to phones where hold the phone with both hands deliberately trying to cover the antenna and pretend the result is somehow meaningful?
Wouldn't a sane signal comparison compare them using reasonably common grips? It's sorta stupid to say "When you deliberately cover both antennas with an awkward two hand grip it'll lose 10 dBm", everyone knows the antenna will lose signal if you cover it, the point is that the iPhone is so easy to cover by accident.
Why wouldn't you be allowed to keep copies for your filter? It would be inane to argue it's harming anyone.
Swedish ISP's as a rule don't have limits and tend to cost something along the line of $10 to $40 depending on bandwidth and extra services.
Why the heck would they have Macintosh there? They don't sell Macintosh. They do sell computers that run Windows and Ubuntu though.
Don't they actively support WINE?
I agree, I was just trying to make the point that the government is mostly doing a decent job at protecting your rights in general even though corporations are generally favored in the civil law system due to their superior resources.
I'm definitely against the IP owners trying to push the investigation duty to other parties, my opinion is that they should focus on combating commercial infringement and leave consumers the heck alone.
It's not like "And it fails miserably at that, having never once upheld my rights" is hard to interpret.
It's pretty old technology, it's basically a transistor that can self-destruct.
That's the entire reason we have government. The most basic service that government provides is protection, when that service is not provided then you get anarchy and your rights quickly become "none whatsoever". Just look at post-invasion Bagdad or post-hurricane New Orleans.
The reason I said that the government provides your rights is because ultimately they're the only ones that can enforce them, what would be the alternatives, pay the corporations to do it? I'm sure they'd be honest, vigilante justice? that works GREAT.
Sure it's to some extent problematic since some of the rights we expect to be enforced is the freedom from the government, but that's why we have to hold the government accountable. However I'll maintain that thinking that the government is not enforcing any of your rights is profoundly ignorant.
Well, they do make horrendously massive use of recaps, footage recycling and fillers. If you removed all the fillers and recaps then barely half the show would remain.
I agree. Generally when sensible people try to prove global warming they point towards more long term things such as the glaciers melting (Which takes a really long time).
Humans in general seems to have a huge issue with the whole data vs anecdote problem, if they spot an outlier they desperately cling onto it and try to claim it's a trend.
Right, if you think western civilization is so horrible why don't you move to africa where they don't have any rights and have to deal with real feudal warlords?
The truth of the matter is that the state is providing you with more rights then you can count, you're just too spoiled to notice.
They said it would have been explicitly noted each time you make a post.
When you press the big shiny button that says "If you press this big shiny button your name will be posted to the internets" then you've forsworn the protection of that piece of personal information. ESRB will only care if the company in question publishes the information without making so explicit to the user.
As far as I know a number of banks offer virtualised credit cards with a specified limit and expiration date. If you generate those cards with the exact amount of money your transaction is worth then the card is useless their database gets hacked.
Uhm, that's not how you calculate median.
The median(the middlemost number) would be
1,1,1,1,[2],3,3,4,5
Information wants to be free generally refers to libre, not gratis. The basic definition is that it's prohibitively difficult to keep things secret as technology progresses.
It's called Global Warming because the averages temperature rises. But that doesn't mean it only leads to more warmth all of the time, the climate changes also lead to more unstable weather overall which means that sometimes yes it'll be colder then normal.
It's so annoying when ignorant people spout "ZOMG, it's snowing, that means global warming is a sham!!!", get a clue about how climate works before spouting out nonsense.