It's not just the UAVs. It's probably also the red light cameras. A war the will never end (there always has been and always will be the threat of terror/fear). The bill going through congress to allow the military to detain U.S. citizens on U.S. soil without trial (with huge bi-partisan and little outrage from the citizenry). Carrier IQ. The idea that a private vendor doesn't have to play by the same rules as the government even if they're acting on behalf of the government. The government needs a warrant to tap your phone, or they can just buy the info from your provider. No one thing makes 1984 and each piece can be justified.
When drones become autonomous we will just say 'I don't see what the big deal is, if you're breaking the law it's no different than a person catching you'. That's already the argument for traffic enforcement via cameras.
It's a hard argument to say any one thing equals 1984.
It doesn't matter how many people vote if there are still only two choices and both choices are beholden to special interest. Considering that districts are drawn up by whatever party is in power at a particular time the system is really gamed. Even on a local level candidates are going to pay more attention to those that donated to their campaign. Heck, when is the last time more than two people ran for president in every state? Sadly, I still vote even though it's pointless.
On the grounds that the post I was replying to suggested they could be liable if they were not bricking phones so that they could make money selling phones to replace stolen ones. That it motivated them to resist taking steps that would discourage theft. Now I don't necessarily think such a class action suit would be valid, I was just running with the idea 'what if they were liable'. My post was less serious in my head.
I doubt very much that they're bricking phones that haven't been reported stolen by the owner.
I doubt that very much too. I don't think anyone thinks they are be bricking stolen phones that aren't reported.
Since Australia has been doing it for ten years perhaps a class action law suit is in order to demand a refund on all phones purchased as the result of theft in the last ten years.
I understand that muggings are violent I just wonder how much bricking stops your typical mugger from still wanting your wallet and how much it stops opportunity theft when someone sets there phone down and walks away from it for a moment.
I think they are saying that bricking phones discourages theft which depresses theft related sales of new phones. I don't know how much revenue is generated replacing stolen phones so I don't know if it's a true statement.
I DO go to my local CD store, buy $10-$15 CD's, rip them for my own use, AND I contribute to my local economy.
I've never understood how buying anything that is not produced locally benefits the local economy. The money was already in the local economy (you had it). When you buy a CD some of it stays local and some of it goes off to the record company some where else. The net result is that money is removed from the local economy. Now if you purchase from local bands that produce their own CDs that would keep the money local. Even better if someone from a nearby town comes over and buys from your local band.
It is really bad when they are not even making the argument that bandwidth is costing too much. They are just making the argument that because they are losing money in department A they are going to raise prices in department B. Perhaps we just shouldn't let Internet Content Providers be Internet Service Providers.
But are they sharing the experience with other people in the living room while on a comfortable recliner or sofa, or are they forever alone in their own bedrooms?
That is a good point. As the technology line blurs between TV and 'monitor' perhaps the differentiation lies in your question.
While broadcast and cable TV may be down in viewership the decline in TV sets probably has more to do with saturation. Pretty much everyone has a TV whether it's used for games, internet video, traditional shows or collecting dust. People are still staring at screens a lot, it is just now connected to a general purpose computer and it's not called a TV.
While there are many lazy clerks it is a matter of motivation and experience. There are way more people that give a check (or more often a credit card) to a friend/son/daughter/secretary etc. to pick something up for them than people who present fraudulent checks/cards. After the 100th argument with someone because you didn't take their mom's check/card will dissuade many clerks from bothering anymore.
Management can do a lot to help this. A well run and consistent policy will let people know what to expect. Every employee has to do the same thing. Management has to communicate what is expected from their employees. A poorly run store where the employee gets in trouble because Ms. Smith has been coming in for years and you didn't know her name is not the name on the check for a variety of reasons and the clerk won't bother anymore.
Yes, they do. Being able to get sole rightrs on the drug is why tneya re invented. It can cost mollions of dollars.*
They did get $10.7 billion in revenues last year. For the most part I'm ok with them making a lot more than the drug costs to develop. After all not every drug is successful. I'm pretty okay with the time for patents. I might argue a little shorter but its a low item for my ideal(ological) patent system. I think the only problem I have is the influence marketing has on people. Not that advertising your products is bad but that many people use it as their sole source of research.
I believe there is a real need for a lot of pharmaceuticals. At the same time I question the number of people who take prescriptions when a healthier lifestyle would be just as beneficial if not more. I am as guilty as anyone in needing to eat better and exercise better. However, I feel that many people (my gut tells me at least half) choose medication over the harder changes in activity/eating habits.
Part of me wants the government to spend more on 'educating' the populace. That part is overridden by it being an unjustifiable expense to put on the government (it's really not government's purpose) . The liberal in me wants to create a utopian government. The conservative in me wants to open a fitness center. I've decided to settle somewhere in the middle with a/. post.:)
Slashdot Mirror
It's not just the UAVs. It's probably also the red light cameras. A war the will never end (there always has been and always will be the threat of terror/fear). The bill going through congress to allow the military to detain U.S. citizens on U.S. soil without trial (with huge bi-partisan and little outrage from the citizenry). Carrier IQ. The idea that a private vendor doesn't have to play by the same rules as the government even if they're acting on behalf of the government. The government needs a warrant to tap your phone, or they can just buy the info from your provider. No one thing makes 1984 and each piece can be justified.
When drones become autonomous we will just say 'I don't see what the big deal is, if you're breaking the law it's no different than a person catching you'. That's already the argument for traffic enforcement via cameras.
It's a hard argument to say any one thing equals 1984.
So if they're only issuing take down notices but not suing there are no penalties?
Begun, the phone wars have.
It doesn't matter how many people vote if there are still only two choices and both choices are beholden to special interest. Considering that districts are drawn up by whatever party is in power at a particular time the system is really gamed. Even on a local level candidates are going to pay more attention to those that donated to their campaign. Heck, when is the last time more than two people ran for president in every state? Sadly, I still vote even though it's pointless.
Given our 'vast' knowledge of the universe they could inhabit ever other solar system in the universe and we could be oblivious.
I find it moderately unlikely that amazon would start revoking your/mine ebooks.
They pulled/deleted 1984
If anything I would expect Watson (or something similar) to file patents before it battles them.
America invented disposable razors. It was an American idea to make things disposable.
If Samsung had changed a single thing on their products there would be no case.
The dimensions are different and doesn't Samsung's tablet have more than one button.
I doubt very much that they're bricking phones that haven't been reported stolen by the owner.
I doubt that very much too. I don't think anyone thinks they are be bricking stolen phones that aren't reported.
Fair enough. I'll concede the point.
Since Australia has been doing it for ten years perhaps a class action law suit is in order to demand a refund on all phones purchased as the result of theft in the last ten years.
I understand that muggings are violent I just wonder how much bricking stops your typical mugger from still wanting your wallet and how much it stops opportunity theft when someone sets there phone down and walks away from it for a moment.
I think they are saying that bricking phones discourages theft which depresses theft related sales of new phones. I don't know how much revenue is generated replacing stolen phones so I don't know if it's a true statement.
I DO go to my local CD store, buy $10-$15 CD's, rip them for my own use, AND I contribute to my local economy.
I've never understood how buying anything that is not produced locally benefits the local economy. The money was already in the local economy (you had it). When you buy a CD some of it stays local and some of it goes off to the record company some where else. The net result is that money is removed from the local economy. Now if you purchase from local bands that produce their own CDs that would keep the money local. Even better if someone from a nearby town comes over and buys from your local band.
It is really bad when they are not even making the argument that bandwidth is costing too much. They are just making the argument that because they are losing money in department A they are going to raise prices in department B. Perhaps we just shouldn't let Internet Content Providers be Internet Service Providers.
But are they sharing the experience with other people in the living room while on a comfortable recliner or sofa, or are they forever alone in their own bedrooms?
That is a good point. As the technology line blurs between TV and 'monitor' perhaps the differentiation lies in your question.
While broadcast and cable TV may be down in viewership the decline in TV sets probably has more to do with saturation. Pretty much everyone has a TV whether it's used for games, internet video, traditional shows or collecting dust. People are still staring at screens a lot, it is just now connected to a general purpose computer and it's not called a TV.
Do you think your average store clerk would be able to detect forged signatures?
Do you think you could? The signature on my license was created with a stylus. It looks different on paper.
It is still worth eating the occasional fraud rather than turn down the hundreds of purchases for people who left their id at home.
the clerks are too lazy
While there are many lazy clerks it is a matter of motivation and experience. There are way more people that give a check (or more often a credit card) to a friend/son/daughter/secretary etc. to pick something up for them than people who present fraudulent checks/cards. After the 100th argument with someone because you didn't take their mom's check/card will dissuade many clerks from bothering anymore.
Management can do a lot to help this. A well run and consistent policy will let people know what to expect. Every employee has to do the same thing. Management has to communicate what is expected from their employees. A poorly run store where the employee gets in trouble because Ms. Smith has been coming in for years and you didn't know her name is not the name on the check for a variety of reasons and the clerk won't bother anymore.
Really. It's bad enough that they tell me I'm not supposed to put my used motor oil and car batteries in the trash. When will the tyranny end?
Yes, they do. Being able to get sole rightrs on the drug is why tneya re invented. It can cost mollions of dollars.*
They did get $10.7 billion in revenues last year. For the most part I'm ok with them making a lot more than the drug costs to develop. After all not every drug is successful. I'm pretty okay with the time for patents. I might argue a little shorter but its a low item for my ideal(ological) patent system. I think the only problem I have is the influence marketing has on people. Not that advertising your products is bad but that many people use it as their sole source of research.
/. post. :)
I believe there is a real need for a lot of pharmaceuticals. At the same time I question the number of people who take prescriptions when a healthier lifestyle would be just as beneficial if not more. I am as guilty as anyone in needing to eat better and exercise better. However, I feel that many people (my gut tells me at least half) choose medication over the harder changes in activity/eating habits.
Part of me wants the government to spend more on 'educating' the populace. That part is overridden by it being an unjustifiable expense to put on the government (it's really not government's purpose) . The liberal in me wants to create a utopian government. The conservative in me wants to open a fitness center. I've decided to settle somewhere in the middle with a
*emphasis mine, original spelling quoted.
overseeing the British arm of News International (incorrectly stated as News Corp in the article above)
News International is the British arm of News Corp.
From Wikipedia
News International Ltd is the United Kingdom newspaper publishing division of News Corporation.
From random WordPress Blog
In Canada’s case, there are 300,000 ex-pats living in the orbit of California’s technology sector.