Yes, like top talent is going to want to move to the US to live in a shitty city.
If they are prejudiced against those places in America then they are welcome to stay home.
Yes, now not wanting to live in specific places is "prejudice".
San Jose isn't exactly a paradise, you know.
It is for tech workings that want to go to the US to be with other top talent. You know, precisely the kind of workers you want to come to the US, as opposed to those that want to come to the US just to get out of whatever place they are in.
What's wrong with Idaho?
Nothing if you are a farmer. Everything if you are a software engineer.
Yes, like top talent is going to want to move to the US to live in a shitty city. You are delusional. You will only get workers from places that are even shittier, but forget about hiring anyone (I'd say, good or not) from Europe, Australia, etc. H1B itself is not a great visa, you know. Your spouse can't work, you can get deported if you are fired and don't find an instant job, etc. So who do you think is going to want to come to the US to live in Idaho under those conditions?
Mostly Indians who hire only Indian visa workers. They call themselves "technology companies" and brag about all the jobs they create.
How is this representative of the many (and I mean many) companies that are started by foreigners that have zero intention of hiring nothing but the best they can afford?
Yes. But this is _nothing different_ to the already existing E-2 visa which will allow you to open a business (any business) in the US and leave here 3 or 5 years (depending on however processes your visa at the embassy) and can be extended indefinitely.
You need to put money at risk (a substantial sum, around $100,000 is recommended by most lawyers) before getting the visa but other than that if the business plan is sound it's likely to get approved.
Yes, it can be used to open a restaurant. That's fine, as long as you hire people who is already allowed to work in the US.
How could this possibly hurt the US economy or its workers? It's just a new business, with foreign money on the line, that must hire people in order to have the visa extended.
If only this were about making a stand against Google, but it's not.
You guys are missing the whole point of this law. It's not about the news corporation making money, really. At all. This is what the law is about:
- Whenever any news article is linked from anything (except "social networks") that "anything" has to pay to the media association. It doesn't matter if you link to a newspaper that doesn't want to be paid. It doesn't work that pay. If there's a link, payment to that association is mandatory.
So the expected result is that there's going to be less links, which means that the small newspapers, blogs, and so on will be less read. Which is the whole fucking point - prevent information "roaming free" as it's happening these days.
This isn't about the media corps taking money from the fee. That's irrelevant. It's about them controlling the flow of information by preventing smaller sources being known by the public.
So how are the old newspaper going to survive if they don't get paid via this link shit? Same as always - they'll take government money (and lot's of it) while they talk about being liberal.
As someone living in Spain and doing business with Banco Santander I can assure you they're experts on bullshit reports.
Whatever this report says (It's not my go potty time yet so I haven't read it) don't worry much unless you are in Spain. If you are then just expect a law on BitCoin to be passed soon.
First of all: Valencia is the most indebted region of Spain in relation to it's GDP (and second in monetary value) . Having spent billions on ill-fated projects (F1 track, Americas Cup, Arts and Science City) that have failed to meet economic returns. The former President resigned over corruption charges, Majors being investigated for contract mishandling and enrichment, a former governor in jailed this same week, etc... No thing that comes from this region is out of suspect.
Thank fuck someone replies knowing what they are talking about.
The last thing Valencia needs is someone putting it as an example of how to do things. Valencia is a corrupt region, and one where corruption is pretty much impossible to eradicate because voters continue to support corrupt politicians election after election, with justifications like "yeah, he stole a lot but he also built a great hospital", and shit like that.
If they moved to linux most likely is because they can't pay for Windows anymore. Or worse - they haven't paid invoices from Microsoft for years and MS is just fed up.
The bigger bonus to this is that it teaches children that constant surveillance is OK and expected.
To be honest I think doing this to children is a lot better than doing it to adults.
I mean, adults are doing nothing about it, but children will quickly learn that they are under surveillance at all times and will take extreme measures to counter it.
I don't know of any child who isn't an expert on defeating their parents control techniques, whatever they are.
That you even need to ask clearly indicates that your moral development as a person has failed. But by all means, try it, break common decency and see what it gets you.
So far no issues. Not everyone is a real asshole worrying about what I do or don't. Everyone that has approached me about Glass just wanted to try it out. Only time I was asked not to carry it (at a posh restaurant where everyone was taking pictures with their phones) I just took it off (note: Now I wouldn't, because I have prescription lenses - if I can't wear glasses at a restaurant I just go somewhere else).
Anyway the fact that you think my moral development has failed because I wear Glass really says a lot about you. Wearing Glass is enough for you? Nothing else matters?
Glasses possibly recording anything when someone is doing something people do naturally (just looking around) is what creeps a lot of people out.
If you are on the street and I record you with Glass, not only I need to be close but I also need to be stopped and looking at you. Directly. You are going to notice for sure. The option of course is that I just walk by and get a useless shot. You probably won't notice though. However if I take my phone out of my pocket and fake it a bit I can probably get a lot of video before you realize I'm recording you.
About surveillance, I must say I prefer there's lots of cameras on the streets controlled by regular citizens than lots of cameras controlled by the government.
I expect that getting beaten up, arrested and the like will make even the worst glasshole realize that what they are doing is completely unacceptable.
Can you elaborate on what you think, exactly, Glass users are doing other than carrying a device on their face? What do you think a Glass user can do that a phone user can't?
Really - the camera on Glass is not useful at all to record or photograph someone without them knowing. If I take a picture of you at 10 meters the picture is useless. There's no zoom, no flash... however if I take a $99 camera with a 8x optical focus I can easily take the picture from a distance and no one is going to look at me funny because I'm taking pictures on the street.
So to sum it up: Get a life. If you see me with Glass just ignore me. I'm not taking pictures of you (or anyone else). I just like the convenience of not taking the phone out of my pocket.
Who, happen to be who? That's right, users(consumers)!:*
At the end of the day, open source was made to attract people who can improve code, and in order for i to happend, they need to use code in the first place!
Oh, and btw, you are also wong about developers.
I am no developer, but I submit bugs to Firefox, etc, so I am part of development progress. I suggest ideas too! So define freeloader. User != freeloader.
If I sugget someoen OSS, am I still freeloader? I do marketing for developer too?
I think the first thing you need to do is chill, then install a spell checker:-)
I wish I had mod points. This is the fundamental problem with Google Glass.
The fundamental problem is people assuming that if I'm wearing Glass I must be recording them. Eventually this fear will go away. Glass is the worst possible device to record/picture anything without being noticed. There's no zoom, you can't really aim (you must be looking at the target, and you will just get a picture of the general area you are looking at).... really, sucks for that.
Glass is a nice toy, but not because it makes spying easier, which as I said, it doesn't.
In general, if you see someone with Glass, you can bet they're actually playing with it and totally ignoring you -or anyone else for that matter-, at least if they just got it. If they've had it for a few months then nothing is happening, except that they might get the occasional notification.
I think we will get used to it, same as we do with cell phones, and an acceptable etiquette will develop.
knowing my name will not be a positive thing for you, as you obviously do not give a monkeys about me just
I don't give a shit about your name until you already told it to me in the past and for some reason you are again close to me, possibly about to say 'hey, do you remember me?'
You do not want to be known as the creepy socio-path with Google glass.
You really haven't used it, have you?
I could complain to the event organisers who would probably ask you to remove your google glass or have you ejected from the building if you refused.
That's fine. I probably don't want to be with you anyway if you can't leave me alone.
There is no need to get involved with you in a physical confrontation. In fact if I really wanted all I need to do is mention to a female colleague that you are scanning her with google glass and you will be ejected and possibly police called.
In other words you realize that "no one" consents to this, so what makes you think it's ok to do it anyhow?
There's a difference between not bothering to opt in and not consenting.
I don't care if someone who already has me in their contact uses this software on me - I understand, if they're like me and we just talked a few times in some social event most likely my face rings a bell but they can't put a name to it.
However I'm not going to bother going to a website to opt in. How would that work anyway?
No one would opt in so it's not a good idea.
Anyway there's good ways to do this, for example ID the person IF they are in one's contacts. I have lousy memory. Of course I know my friends, but in places are a conference I meet lots of people that I eventually find the next year or whatever, they ring a bell and I know we even talked for a bit but I can't remember their names. I don't think it's too intrusive since I've met them and they told me their names that Glass reminds me - maybe even some extra info, such as "You know them from Google I/O 2012.".
By the way, to all the idiots saying they would punch me if I was wearing Glass close to them: First, eventually you will be outnumbered. Second, the fact that you would hit someone for no reason other than you don't like what they might be doing says a lot about you. And third, things might go wrong for you, Glass is hands free so I'm likely to return the punch.
complete failing of organizations to have or heaven forbid enforce policies about password practices
Most of the time the problem is the opposite. Absurd policies and a delusion of the password being important to the user. And lately, the retarded concept of the security questions that the user cannot choose (or can choose from a set or around the same 10 in every site).
For like 95% of the sites I don't give a shit if my account if hacked. I use the same password for most of those sites (if they are too retarded with requirements I might add a few 0s or #s at the end). If you make me change the password even if once a year then I'm not going back to your site because I don't care much about it in the first place. So I'll forget the new password.
-Passwords on sticky notes on monitors.
-Passwords shared with co-workers, that have not been granted access.
System does not require default password to be changed.
None of these are user problems. They are system design problems which I can translate to this:
- They make me change the password every 90 days, so I have to write it down.
- Danny needs to access credit card information because it's part of his job to do refunds but they won't give him access because for some reason that also means they have to give him access to XXX (they have one permission for two things) so I have to type my password at his terminal 10 a day. I cannot be interrupted that much, or I might not be around, etc, so I just let him use my password.
- My sysadmin uses the same default password for everyone.
If I'm sitting in a restaurant and there's someone on the next table pointing a camera phone at me then I am going to complain.
It's not going to be pointed at you. It will be pointed to the person in front of the owner - much more likely to complain than you if needed.
I still haven't met anyone who has actually tried Glass for a second and then complained about it being intrusive for others. Really, it's not. I cannot record without you knowing (I would have to be staring at you and if I do that then I'm annoying regardless or whether I'm wearing Glass or not). Also keep in mind that Glass has no zoom, so recording from a distance is really pointless.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, like top talent is going to want to move to the US to live in a shitty city.
If they are prejudiced against those places in America then they are welcome to stay home.
Yes, now not wanting to live in specific places is "prejudice".
San Jose isn't exactly a paradise, you know.
It is for tech workings that want to go to the US to be with other top talent. You know, precisely the kind of workers you want to come to the US, as opposed to those that want to come to the US just to get out of whatever place they are in.
What's wrong with Idaho?
Nothing if you are a farmer. Everything if you are a software engineer.
Yes, like top talent is going to want to move to the US to live in a shitty city. You are delusional. You will only get workers from places that are even shittier, but forget about hiring anyone (I'd say, good or not) from Europe, Australia, etc. H1B itself is not a great visa, you know. Your spouse can't work, you can get deported if you are fired and don't find an instant job, etc. So who do you think is going to want to come to the US to live in Idaho under those conditions?
Mostly Indians who hire only Indian visa workers. They call themselves "technology companies" and brag about all the jobs they create.
How is this representative of the many (and I mean many) companies that are started by foreigners that have zero intention of hiring nothing but the best they can afford?
Well more companies hiring Americans is a good thing. If these more companies do nothing but ship money overseas then they are nothing but leaches.
Do you realize that the wealthier _American_ companies keep their stash of money overseas to avoid paying U.S. taxes?
Yes. But this is _nothing different_ to the already existing E-2 visa which will allow you to open a business (any business) in the US and leave here 3 or 5 years (depending on however processes your visa at the embassy) and can be extended indefinitely.
You need to put money at risk (a substantial sum, around $100,000 is recommended by most lawyers) before getting the visa but other than that if the business plan is sound it's likely to get approved.
Yes, it can be used to open a restaurant. That's fine, as long as you hire people who is already allowed to work in the US.
How could this possibly hurt the US economy or its workers? It's just a new business, with foreign money on the line, that must hire people in order to have the visa extended.
...and a little bit retarded.
If only this were about making a stand against Google, but it's not.
You guys are missing the whole point of this law. It's not about the news corporation making money, really. At all. This is what the law is about:
- Whenever any news article is linked from anything (except "social networks") that "anything" has to pay to the media association. It doesn't matter if you link to a newspaper that doesn't want to be paid. It doesn't work that pay. If there's a link, payment to that association is mandatory.
So the expected result is that there's going to be less links, which means that the small newspapers, blogs, and so on will be less read. Which is the whole fucking point - prevent information "roaming free" as it's happening these days.
This isn't about the media corps taking money from the fee. That's irrelevant. It's about them controlling the flow of information by preventing smaller sources being known by the public.
So how are the old newspaper going to survive if they don't get paid via this link shit? Same as always - they'll take government money (and lot's of it) while they talk about being liberal.
The "as much as I hate Apple" line is getting old. That's like a sentence that starts with "I'm not racist but...".
Quite the opposite. It would like a sentence as "I'm a racist, but that nigger is right..."
As someone living in Spain and doing business with Banco Santander I can assure you they're experts on bullshit reports. Whatever this report says (It's not my go potty time yet so I haven't read it) don't worry much unless you are in Spain. If you are then just expect a law on BitCoin to be passed soon.
First of all: Valencia is the most indebted region of Spain in relation to it's GDP (and second in monetary value) . Having spent billions on ill-fated projects (F1 track, Americas Cup, Arts and Science City) that have failed to meet economic returns. The former President resigned over corruption charges, Majors being investigated for contract mishandling and enrichment, a former governor in jailed this same week, etc... No thing that comes from this region is out of suspect.
Thank fuck someone replies knowing what they are talking about.
The last thing Valencia needs is someone putting it as an example of how to do things. Valencia is a corrupt region, and one where corruption is pretty much impossible to eradicate because voters continue to support corrupt politicians election after election, with justifications like "yeah, he stole a lot but he also built a great hospital", and shit like that.
If they moved to linux most likely is because they can't pay for Windows anymore. Or worse - they haven't paid invoices from Microsoft for years and MS is just fed up.
The bigger bonus to this is that it teaches children that constant surveillance is OK and expected.
To be honest I think doing this to children is a lot better than doing it to adults. I mean, adults are doing nothing about it, but children will quickly learn that they are under surveillance at all times and will take extreme measures to counter it. I don't know of any child who isn't an expert on defeating their parents control techniques, whatever they are.
Did you get a raise? I mean, with all that extra experience you didn't have when you signed up...
My phone needs to, in order of decreasing importance
...
1) Play Ingress.
I can live without the voice calls.
I have the same problem with my oven. In decreasing order of importance it needs to
1) Print both sides
2) Have a fax
3) Scan documents
Seriously...Have you considered the possibility that what you need is not a phone?
That you even need to ask clearly indicates that your moral development as a person has failed. But by all means, try it, break common decency and see what it gets you.
So far no issues. Not everyone is a real asshole worrying about what I do or don't. Everyone that has approached me about Glass just wanted to try it out. Only time I was asked not to carry it (at a posh restaurant where everyone was taking pictures with their phones) I just took it off (note: Now I wouldn't, because I have prescription lenses - if I can't wear glasses at a restaurant I just go somewhere else).
Anyway the fact that you think my moral development has failed because I wear Glass really says a lot about you. Wearing Glass is enough for you? Nothing else matters?
Glasses possibly recording anything when someone is doing something people do naturally (just looking around) is what creeps a lot of people out.
If you are on the street and I record you with Glass, not only I need to be close but I also need to be stopped and looking at you. Directly. You are going to notice for sure. The option of course is that I just walk by and get a useless shot. You probably won't notice though. However if I take my phone out of my pocket and fake it a bit I can probably get a lot of video before you realize I'm recording you.
About surveillance, I must say I prefer there's lots of cameras on the streets controlled by regular citizens than lots of cameras controlled by the government.
I expect that getting beaten up, arrested and the like will make even the worst glasshole realize that what they are doing is completely unacceptable.
Can you elaborate on what you think, exactly, Glass users are doing other than carrying a device on their face? What do you think a Glass user can do that a phone user can't?
Really - the camera on Glass is not useful at all to record or photograph someone without them knowing. If I take a picture of you at 10 meters the picture is useless. There's no zoom, no flash... however if I take a $99 camera with a 8x optical focus I can easily take the picture from a distance and no one is going to look at me funny because I'm taking pictures on the street.
So to sum it up: Get a life. If you see me with Glass just ignore me. I'm not taking pictures of you (or anyone else). I just like the convenience of not taking the phone out of my pocket.
Apple could be in a position to leverage advances in sensing technology to make medicine cheaper and much more accessible.
Low prices is Apple's motto all right
Who, happen to be who? That's right, users(consumers)! :*
At the end of the day, open source was made to attract people who can improve code, and in order for i to happend, they need to use code in the first place!
Oh, and btw, you are also wong about developers.
I am no developer, but I submit bugs to Firefox, etc, so I am part of development progress. I suggest ideas too! So define freeloader. User != freeloader.
If I sugget someoen OSS, am I still freeloader? I do marketing for developer too?
I think the first thing you need to do is chill, then install a spell checker :-)
Why? The reason to open source is (usually) to get more developers involved.
I wish I had mod points. This is the fundamental problem with Google Glass.
The fundamental problem is people assuming that if I'm wearing Glass I must be recording them. Eventually this fear will go away. Glass is the worst possible device to record/picture anything without being noticed. There's no zoom, you can't really aim (you must be looking at the target, and you will just get a picture of the general area you are looking at).... really, sucks for that.
Glass is a nice toy, but not because it makes spying easier, which as I said, it doesn't.
In general, if you see someone with Glass, you can bet they're actually playing with it and totally ignoring you -or anyone else for that matter-, at least if they just got it. If they've had it for a few months then nothing is happening, except that they might get the occasional notification.
I think we will get used to it, same as we do with cell phones, and an acceptable etiquette will develop.
knowing my name will not be a positive thing for you, as you obviously do not give a monkeys about me just
I don't give a shit about your name until you already told it to me in the past and for some reason you are again close to me, possibly about to say 'hey, do you remember me?'
You do not want to be known as the creepy socio-path with Google glass.
You really haven't used it, have you?
I could complain to the event organisers who would probably ask you to remove your google glass or have you ejected from the building if you refused.
That's fine. I probably don't want to be with you anyway if you can't leave me alone.
There is no need to get involved with you in a physical confrontation. In fact if I really wanted all I need to do is mention to a female colleague that you are scanning her with google glass and you will be ejected and possibly police called.
WTF do you think Glass is?
In other words you realize that "no one" consents to this, so what makes you think it's ok to do it anyhow?
There's a difference between not bothering to opt in and not consenting.
I don't care if someone who already has me in their contact uses this software on me - I understand, if they're like me and we just talked a few times in some social event most likely my face rings a bell but they can't put a name to it.
However I'm not going to bother going to a website to opt in. How would that work anyway?
How about letting us opt in to the database?
No one would opt in so it's not a good idea.
Anyway there's good ways to do this, for example ID the person IF they are in one's contacts. I have lousy memory. Of course I know my friends, but in places are a conference I meet lots of people that I eventually find the next year or whatever, they ring a bell and I know we even talked for a bit but I can't remember their names. I don't think it's too intrusive since I've met them and they told me their names that Glass reminds me - maybe even some extra info, such as "You know them from Google I/O 2012.".
By the way, to all the idiots saying they would punch me if I was wearing Glass close to them: First, eventually you will be outnumbered. Second, the fact that you would hit someone for no reason other than you don't like what they might be doing says a lot about you. And third, things might go wrong for you, Glass is hands free so I'm likely to return the punch.
complete failing of organizations to have or heaven forbid enforce policies about password practices
Most of the time the problem is the opposite. Absurd policies and a delusion of the password being important to the user. And lately, the retarded concept of the security questions that the user cannot choose (or can choose from a set or around the same 10 in every site).
For like 95% of the sites I don't give a shit if my account if hacked. I use the same password for most of those sites (if they are too retarded with requirements I might add a few 0s or #s at the end). If you make me change the password even if once a year then I'm not going back to your site because I don't care much about it in the first place. So I'll forget the new password.
-Passwords on sticky notes on monitors.
-Passwords shared with co-workers, that have not been granted access.
System does not require default password to be changed.
None of these are user problems. They are system design problems which I can translate to this:
- They make me change the password every 90 days, so I have to write it down.
- Danny needs to access credit card information because it's part of his job to do refunds but they won't give him access because for some reason that also means they have to give him access to XXX (they have one permission for two things) so I have to type my password at his terminal 10 a day. I cannot be interrupted that much, or I might not be around, etc, so I just let him use my password.
- My sysadmin uses the same default password for everyone.
If I'm sitting in a restaurant and there's someone on the next table pointing a camera phone at me then I am going to complain.
It's not going to be pointed at you. It will be pointed to the person in front of the owner - much more likely to complain than you if needed. I still haven't met anyone who has actually tried Glass for a second and then complained about it being intrusive for others. Really, it's not. I cannot record without you knowing (I would have to be staring at you and if I do that then I'm annoying regardless or whether I'm wearing Glass or not). Also keep in mind that Glass has no zoom, so recording from a distance is really pointless.
And if the glasshole from the story had put his Google Glass in his pocket,
You can't. Glass the (obvious) design flaw of not having fold-able temples. It's one piece, so you can't easily put it away.