The problem is that if software is working, and you "upgrade" it, two things can happen: it can continue to work, or it can fail, often mysteriously. Given that, it's not shocking that people tend to leave software alone if it is currently functioning.
This! It is a huge issue for both vendors, writers, and users. One OS vendor with a track record of updates breaking systems that led to many people refusing to update recently went no choice on us. With predictable bad results, which just reinforces the idea of not updating if it works.
I did a data transfer on a computer a couple years ago that had a never updated Windows XP OS on it. It was in use every day, and it was not updated once. Not the OS, not the Flash, not the browser, nothing. What brought the computer in was that Google refused to connect with it any more.
We drink ale over here, and not at room temperature. We don't call the superchilled tasteless low alcohol content diluted horse piss you drink beer.
Yeah - ummm, You need to come over and try some of our Horse Piss beer. Presumably you are referring to BudMillerCoors. That shit is mainly for College student who just want to get pissed. I don't drink beer by country, but the proper beer that 'Murrica brews is the equal of anything brewed anywhere as far as quality goes. Ironically, my lawnmower beer is British,
Those shits in the UK want to get rid of bartenders? Screw that. Who's gonna take my keys away and tell me my wife is being kind of a bitch and that I should lay down the law at home? Maybe the British should focus on inventing a self-driving dentist first, huh?
Oh..... BURN!
Anyway, they drink that shit warm over in England, so I don't think we should follow their lead on anything. It's no wonder their "football" players collapse in a screaming heap whenever the opposing team so much as breathes on them.
This seems like such a bitched up idea that It reminds me of an April Fools story. I'm not all that talkative, but some banal pleasantries with a barkeep or waitstaff is just a part of the experience. Where we go, it's enjoyable and informative to chat with the person about what they think about a particular beer or liquor.
So they are gonna trade this pleasant experience with a Robot that will serve you advertisements, will share what you are drinking with your Facebook page, your OHR, and law enforcement.
I was thinking the same thing. "Let's trick the AI to brew an IPA, except with dark malt and a hint of peppermint!"
Why on earth would a brewpub ever want to change composition of it's products? I suppose if a beer really sucked, it might be good feedback, but there are a lot of tastes, and changeing a beer to suit some people will just piss some others off because they miss a flavor profile they cant get any more.
I like the idea of a lager IPA with no hops blonde Stout.
Or a heavily noble hopped Scottish lager that's been let sit under a UV light for a month.
What's to stop people from going online and submitting bogus feedback. For example, demanding so much carbonation that all you ever get is a glass of foam?
Yup, and even if people give honest reviews, what happens when they demand an IPA taste like Budweiser?
This sounds like a fad - I hope. I enjoy the interaction between the staff and myself, and my better half is prone to getting into long conversations with them. A robot that serves me beer that I have to take an online survey about is not a bar I would go to.
I agree. They should pay a price. Like say pay a subscription to a service that provides this for them. I heard www.dropbox.com has such a service and the premium subscription isn't too expensive.
And if they don't provide that service any more? Should DropBox be forced to provide it? If the concept of a pubic folder is smart, there should be dozens of vendors waiting to tgrab all th ebusiness DropBox will lose as a result of their decision.
No. It's detached from reality to expect everyone knows everything that isn't rocket... surgery. You're completely oblivious to how difficult this is, worn down by years and years of computer use no doubt. That doesn't change the fact that not knowing something specific about one specific field doesn't mean someone is stupid.
How odd you call it "worn down". Just something I happen to know a little bit about.
Not many of us do everything we need to do ourselves. I don't do my own oil changes or work on my vehicles any more - although I used to when I was young and poorer. I do maintain my motorcycle for fun now. But I know enough to pay attention to what I'm told, and they show me any parts they change. If my garage decides they don't install tires any more, I go to a shop that does. I don't demand that ththe shop resume changing my tires, and moan about how good people who are really smart can't get their tires changed there any more.
Now what would people think about someone who can't get an incredibly common English idiom right while complaining about someone else's lack of knowledge in another field? I mean English isn't exactly rocket science or brain surgery. But I don't think less of you for it.
Everyone who knows me, including my Asperger's friends, whould understand immediately that it was a small joke, meant to be humorous. Did you seriously not get that? Both Rocket science and Brain Surgery are considered quite difficult, so you combine the two and now you have something that is sortakinda really difficult.
Regardless, the lame little joke was made quite on purpose.
After all you may be able to work with an English professor to help set up his owncloud.
He would have understood immediatly what I was doing with my comment. Most of them enjoy wordplay.
That way he doesn't use Dropbox when he shares his description of common idioms, and the world is better for both of your efforts.
The good professor might even use my rocket surgery as an example of a mixed metaphor.
Or you could just be a self righteous jerk on the internet, claiming superiority over all those people who don't conform to your specific flavour of intelligence.
It's possible that I could be, although most people who know me find me kinda charming, funny and self deprecating. And willing to run through walls for them. If I have a failing in this regard, it is not suffering bullshit.
And you know what? I tell them many of the things that I told you.They need to be careful. They need to realize that they are depending on someone else, and that they have to pay the price for that, and limit the number of things that can go wrong, like utilizing a cloud service in an era where cloud services aren't permanent. Oddly - or enlightening enough, instead of pissing them off, they understand that I have their back. They know I won't lie or bullshit them. A lot of clients have become personal friends. Anyhow, as it is clear that you are starting to dip into the ever classy name calling game, Good day sir.
Nope, just 99.9% of the internet population. If you think this is any different then you need a serious reality check.
The reality check is not on my part. If you don't want to do the work - you must pay the price. This means that sometimes you will get screwed in your estimation. That is reality. If you want to have control, you must exert control. Because if you don't have control, you might just lose public folder priveliges. This is not rocket science, it's just like how years ago my Mother in law used to get new mufflers every inspection until I took her car in and told them "Prove that her muffler went bad in 6 months."
I would. Some of the smartest people in the world are incapable in the world are incapable of complex IT solutions. Some of the most resourceful gatherers and providers of information are barely able to figure out how to log into an internet forum.
Then they pay the price, and are at the mercy of the providers who can figure this stuff out. Is that a difficult concept?
I'm not certain why this concept is so hard to grasp. If you rely on a business to do things like provide a public folder for your files, you simply have to put up with what they provide you with, or of course find another vendor. And if Dropbox tells you 4 years ago they are going to stop it, it isn't like you didn't know - you just weren't paying attention.
That's where the person who relies on others to do their work get in trouble. I'll bet a lot of people didn't bother to check on any notices given. Why? Because they might not have the acumen to do it. Or it wasn't important to them. Until it went away.
And the concept of using a dropbox public folder to link from a web page (someone in here mentioned that) is bizarre. If you have a web page, you have someone providing it. I suppose in these folks, they must have someone doing the web pages, why on earth would they link to a public dropbox instead of having links on their site that access a folder on their site? That's crazy. I've got hundreds of pdf files people need to access on my site, and not one of them is taking you away form the site, and they'll never go away unless I want them to. Probem solved.
Finally, if DropBox decides for financial or legal liability reasons they want to no longer have public folders, and gives customers 5 years to change, well, the customers should get another cloud vendor that provides public folders on their cloud, and have some person who knos this stuff change their links. Or of course, they could do something that makes more sense, like have a person who knows this stuff do a new site that makes sense.
The researchers are not claiming that Vitamin D deficiency causes autism. They are claiming it increases the "Risk of Developing Autism", which is subtly different. Lots of chronic diseases and conditions are not so cut and dry as "Vitamin D deficiency causes Rickets".
Pedantics. The basis is the same. If more children become autistic among women who have a deficiency of Vitamin D, then there is the possibility of having women who get the proper amount having children who do not become autistic. Perhaps the lack of vitamin D does not specifically cause autism, but it might block what does specifically cause autism in a child who is predisposed.
Even with the moral questions ignored, it may be impossible to show a 1:1 causation between any single environmental factor and autism development, but we can potentially learn which factors can causally influence risk.
Sure. It's like the tobacco industry laywers argument - though not in the service of obvious evil.
But there is hardly any good reason to set out purposely deprive anyone fmor a proven nutrient, so what we do is take the moral yet roundabout method of a push for all people to address the lack of vitamin D since present day lifestyles and some people's genetic dispositions and locations do not match. As well, it is well documented that Vitamin D is a real problem today : https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p...https://www.cdc.gov/media/rele...
We know the effects of a lack of vitamin D, it is not in doubt. So that's where the moral problem of a controlled experiment comes into play. If the concept of vitamin D deficiency is related in some manner to development of autism, it is hard to come up with a moral way to deprive people of it.
The only possible moral experiment would be to have a recommendation that all women receive enough vitamin D, then take a control group who are specifically tested and monitored for proper Vitamin D levels, then comparing the autism rate of their offspring to the general public. It's not remotely perfect, but as noted, some of the most likely Vitamin D deficient people have a well documented and well deserved suspicion of human medical experimentation. It isn't paranoia when you can point to historical documents. I've no doubt that you can tell an American of African descent that she need to make certain she gets enough Vitamin D, but you will probably get a different reaction to asking her to be in a study, and "here - take these". People who have been purposefully infected with Veneraial diseases, and treated by being not treated, who have infected their wives and children (congenital syphilis) by race are perhaps not going to trust that approach.
Regardless, can you come up with a moral excuse for anyone to be deprived of Vitamins?
Please advise all the push here dummy internet users how they can setup their own server on their own HDD in their own home and control it themselves.
You instantly fail this challenge if it is more complicated than entering an email address, password, clicking upload, and then clicking share.
So it's like those bottom dwelling reality show people are who we must aim for?
I personally don't give a damn about people who's ability is capped at an email address, a Password1, and clicking on "share".
How many of those people you figure are sharing anything of worth? Memes?
Exactly how stupid do we need to get before deciding that breathing is too hard?
How many of the least common denominator people do you think are paying for the service?
While I personally do no hold a Dropbox account, this decision pisses me off to no end just as much as it does their own users. When looking for rare content required for administering and managing legacy hardware and software, users have been hosting them on public Dropbox accounts.
It's too bad there is no other solution. Like maybe these people, who seem to have a web page, could store their files on their hosting service? My hosting service has all of my different files I need to distribute, and it can be as complex or as simple as I like. I have control of the files, and have local and site backup.
Yes, I pay for it - and despite some protestations by people who do pay for Dropbox, I'm certain that most of the butthurt minions are modern day "everything must be free!" people who have bought into the "free" cloud.
Yeah I'm sure the run of the mill person is capable of that. It's amazing how detached from reality slashdot has become.
Well, if the run of the mill person is incapable and who we're aiming at, they have to pay a price for not wanting to learn, or not having the time. That's actually pretty simple supply and demand. If I host a cloud service, I make the rules. If I have to use Dropbox, I play by their rules.
And is it detached from reality to note that this stuff isn't exactly rocket surgery?
Unlike the child posters, I'll refrain from being an AC. If your process could be made derp-proof, I'd be all for it. Unfortunately, few non-geeks have the acumen to implement such a backup plan. The Cloud(tm) remains the only practical solution for most.
Then they put up with whatever their cloud provider makes them put up with. If you absolutely must have the cloud, and absolutely refuse to learn a few simple things, then you go with dropbox or some other, pay the bill, and do as they tell ya.
I can understand why people might be upset, but if not of the alternatives are acceptable to them, then looks like they just have to be upset.
I pay for my domain name, host all data on my server and back the server content encrypted to my home machine and to a friend of mine home machine. I never had any problems. I have always been puzzled by people trusting free services to host their important and even sometimes sensitive data.
I think there are a couple reasons - not good ones either.
Suits love the idea of the cloud, and there are people lined up to tell them what they like to hear. You can get rid of a lot of payroll, it's secure, it has a cool name, and nothing can go wrong, and we'll take care of all your backups, and by this time the suit needs a post-priandal cigarette.
And people who are just a little too trusting that the outfit the store their stuff on is going to be in business forever, is going to maintain the feature that they like forever, and that their cloud vendor actually gives a damn about them.
But it being the cloud - it's just the the cloud, and you might find yourself facing a similar situation with your next cloud supplier, and the one after that, and the one after that.
I'll bet it is more than just cost that causes this dropping of public folders. But regardless of the reasons, when you are a customer of some outfit that stores your stuff on their servers, you are just a customer, not a boss.
And you aren't concerned that a foreign country directly altered the outcome of an election here?
The Trump supporters are not. As long as they won, any way they did it was okay. And before I'm marked as Troll, read sexconker's post right below. He actually approves of other countries meddling in the US electoral process.
Technically, oil is created continuously.....just REALLY slowly.
And probably not in the amounts that would be useful any more.
If we were to get technical, the local lake that I go canoeing on would be producing coal eventually. Each summer it becomes full of vareious water lilies. The die back in the fall, and the vegetable matter sinks to the bottom ans slowly produces methane and compresses. The bubbles rise continously during the summer and fall, and a lot come up when I'm paddling in the shallow regions of the lake. The paddle scrapes against them and its a bubble blast. I wouldn't dare strike a flame at that point.
But if they do ever produce coal, it will be a thin little sliver. It is not at all likely that a Pennsylvanian age will ever repeat itself. The same is likely with oil creation.
There was a time when we had a pretty awful approach to medical experimentatino on humans. The Tuskegee syphilis experiment is one of the worst examples. There was another STD experiment called the Guatamalan syphilis Experiment. And by the way, given the nature of the experiments, good luck in getting cooperation from dark pigmented people as they have a well earned distrust of medical experimentation. And Black women in northern climates are probably the number one risk group.
You will probably really stand up for the experiments on children during the mid-1960's At the Willwbrook State School in Staten Island, a school for the mentally deficient, they intentionally injected children with Hepatitis in order to see if Gamma Globulin could cure it. That's pretty sweet and kindly.
Anyhow, they rationalized it by declaring that since so many of the children became infected with Hep, it wasn't a big deal. Oddly enough, it was never made clear why they didn't test Gamma Globulin on the children who already contracted hepatitis.
In 1948 REsearchers gave over 800 pregnant women "vitamin drinks" that contained radioactive iron to examine the placental/ mother's blood transfer. At the Massachusetts based Walter E. Fernald State School, the AEC and Quaker Oats performed a experiment of given them oatmeal with radioactive Calcium in it to track digestion of Calcium. The students were told they were joining a science club.
There are a lot more, but when these abuses - and I seriously hope you would also consider them abuses, a lot of ethical concerns, and eventually ethics committees and regulations came into existence.
While there might be some clandestine stuff still going on, any program such as one that is aimed at studying autism causes is going to be closely studied for three reasons. One is that it's an obvious one, to possibly help children avoid becoming autistic. The second one is that it involves mothers and children at all, so it will have ahigh priority. The thirs is a bit of an embarrassment, because people who for some reason are heavily invested in the belief that vaccines cause autism, will want to debunk the experiments in any way possible. If you don't believe me, just look at what happened when they removed the original "cause of autism" th emerthiolate from vaccines, and it had no effect. So without any proof, the anti vaxxers just decided it was "something else".
Test it with existing data. If it's true, populations more likely to be vitamin D deficient (darker skins at higher latitudes) will already have higher autism rates. Do black folks in Chicago have higher autism rates than in the south? (Where we know the population migrated from, mostly less than 100 years ago.)
Data will be called racist, so compare dark skinned folks at different latitudes.
Good luck with African descent people to agree with any test like you suggest. They don't trust the medical profession in that way, and they have a good reason not to.
The only thing you've demonstrated in your rant here is that you don't give a shit about the concept of choice.
I'm sorry if that appeared as a rant to you. I was just trying to tell AC why I don't give a shit, and that at least one perosn isn't telling him "you don't get it". I have no particular involvement other than trying to help people understand.
Thanks to that attitude, the rest of the damn industry will now be following the obscenely profitable Apple model of take-it-and-like-it hardware design, with nothing but proprietary connections and zero upgrade capability across every device.
Well, I don't actually give a shit. I don't think profits are necessarily obscene either.
Had consumers not turned into mindless lemmings, we might still have common sense hardware designs like replaceable batteries that offer more than a $700 paperweight that prematurely ends up in a landfill.
I dunno, seems my iPhone 5 is keeping someone else happy now, at least if I wasn't lied to by the guy at Verizon. By the way, there is a weird disconnect between your idea that Apple is giving the stupid consumers no choice, but then demand that something you like is forced upon them. That's kinda wanting it both ways. You just want to force your idea of what is right upon people. And by the way - A battery in an iPhone is replaceable. Takes a little more effort, but the concept that they are not replaceable is wrong.
Don't assume this will stop with electronics either. At this fucking rate, your next car will come complete with non-removable tires. Enjoy the reaming from the capitalistic dick of greed, all because consumers don't give a shit.
Oh godness gracious! You accuse me of ranting and you finish up with this tidbit? Chillaxe, my good man.
If replaceable batteries and legacy headphone jacks are deal breakers, you have to determine why. I doubt it is stupidiy of the user. Having an iPhone 7, I can plug the corded headphones right into the phone. If for some reason I wanted to use the 10 dollar headphones that so many people mention as a wonderful reason to stick with an amdriod phone, I can plug them into the adapter, and plug that into the phone. This is where the "I don't give a shit" comes in. Either of those actions is ridiculously simple. Easier than typing out a sentence. The replacement battery? If you take care of your phone and battery, it shouldn't matter. When I traded in my Iphone 5, the battery was still working well. I needed no replacement battery.
So if the replaceable battery is a deabreaker then get a phone with one, and be happy. If the lack of a legacy headphone jack and the inconvenience of plugging the suppled headset into the thing or using the supplied adapter into the phone leaves you cold, then you need a phone with both a replaceable battery and a legacy phone jack.
But you shouldn't proclaim that everyone else is stupid because they don't subscribe to your pronouncements of how things should be. Seems like with a replaceable battery you should be able to keep your phone going forever, so no need to impose your will on everyone else who doesn't share it.
How on earth is it okay, in 2016, to store plaintext passwords for a file encryption tool?
Now that's a different question, and you are correct - it isn't okay. And it isn't actually okay to have it accessible before the thing finishes booting. My entire argument isn't that it is not a bad thing, just that it isn't a likely thing. And in any even, the issue has been repaired with an update, so only un-updated machines will be at risk. I kinda doubt many of those were encrypted anyhow. Fortunately, I've never had a reason to not update a Mac.
Slashdot Mirror
The problem is that if software is working, and you "upgrade" it, two things can happen: it can continue to work, or it can fail, often mysteriously. Given that, it's not shocking that people tend to leave software alone if it is currently functioning.
This! It is a huge issue for both vendors, writers, and users. One OS vendor with a track record of updates breaking systems that led to many people refusing to update recently went no choice on us. With predictable bad results, which just reinforces the idea of not updating if it works.
I did a data transfer on a computer a couple years ago that had a never updated Windows XP OS on it. It was in use every day, and it was not updated once. Not the OS, not the Flash, not the browser, nothing. What brought the computer in was that Google refused to connect with it any more.
bean counters or marketing weasels
- hah - these are the real source of insecurity!
This truth is sitting here at only +2?
We drink ale over here, and not at room temperature. We don't call the superchilled tasteless low alcohol content diluted horse piss you drink beer.
Yeah - ummm, You need to come over and try some of our Horse Piss beer. Presumably you are referring to BudMillerCoors. That shit is mainly for College student who just want to get pissed. I don't drink beer by country, but the proper beer that 'Murrica brews is the equal of anything brewed anywhere as far as quality goes. Ironically, my lawnmower beer is British,
Those shits in the UK want to get rid of bartenders? Screw that. Who's gonna take my keys away and tell me my wife is being kind of a bitch and that I should lay down the law at home? Maybe the British should focus on inventing a self-driving dentist first, huh?
Oh..... BURN!
Anyway, they drink that shit warm over in England, so I don't think we should follow their lead on anything. It's no wonder their "football" players collapse in a screaming heap whenever the opposing team so much as breathes on them.
This seems like such a bitched up idea that It reminds me of an April Fools story. I'm not all that talkative, but some banal pleasantries with a barkeep or waitstaff is just a part of the experience. Where we go, it's enjoyable and informative to chat with the person about what they think about a particular beer or liquor.
So they are gonna trade this pleasant experience with a Robot that will serve you advertisements, will share what you are drinking with your Facebook page, your OHR, and law enforcement.
But does the robot have nice tits?
I was thinking the same thing. "Let's trick the AI to brew an IPA, except with dark malt and a hint of peppermint!"
Why on earth would a brewpub ever want to change composition of it's products? I suppose if a beer really sucked, it might be good feedback, but there are a lot of tastes, and changeing a beer to suit some people will just piss some others off because they miss a flavor profile they cant get any more.
I like the idea of a lager IPA with no hops blonde Stout.
Or a heavily noble hopped Scottish lager that's been let sit under a UV light for a month.
What's to stop people from going online and submitting bogus feedback. For example, demanding so much carbonation that all you ever get is a glass of foam?
Yup, and even if people give honest reviews, what happens when they demand an IPA taste like Budweiser?
This sounds like a fad - I hope. I enjoy the interaction between the staff and myself, and my better half is prone to getting into long conversations with them. A robot that serves me beer that I have to take an online survey about is not a bar I would go to.
Man, nothing gets past you.
That's my fetish!
they have to pay a price for not wanting to learn
I agree. They should pay a price. Like say pay a subscription to a service that provides this for them. I heard www.dropbox.com has such a service and the premium subscription isn't too expensive.
And if they don't provide that service any more? Should DropBox be forced to provide it? If the concept of a pubic folder is smart, there should be dozens of vendors waiting to tgrab all th ebusiness DropBox will lose as a result of their decision.
No. It's detached from reality to expect everyone knows everything that isn't rocket ... surgery. You're completely oblivious to how difficult this is, worn down by years and years of computer use no doubt. That doesn't change the fact that not knowing something specific about one specific field doesn't mean someone is stupid.
How odd you call it "worn down". Just something I happen to know a little bit about.
Not many of us do everything we need to do ourselves. I don't do my own oil changes or work on my vehicles any more - although I used to when I was young and poorer. I do maintain my motorcycle for fun now. But I know enough to pay attention to what I'm told, and they show me any parts they change. If my garage decides they don't install tires any more, I go to a shop that does. I don't demand that ththe shop resume changing my tires, and moan about how good people who are really smart can't get their tires changed there any more.
Now what would people think about someone who can't get an incredibly common English idiom right while complaining about someone else's lack of knowledge in another field? I mean English isn't exactly rocket science or brain surgery. But I don't think less of you for it.
Everyone who knows me, including my Asperger's friends, whould understand immediately that it was a small joke, meant to be humorous. Did you seriously not get that? Both Rocket science and Brain Surgery are considered quite difficult, so you combine the two and now you have something that is sortakinda really difficult.
Regardless, the lame little joke was made quite on purpose.
After all you may be able to work with an English professor to help set up his owncloud.
He would have understood immediatly what I was doing with my comment. Most of them enjoy wordplay.
That way he doesn't use Dropbox when he shares his description of common idioms, and the world is better for both of your efforts.
The good professor might even use my rocket surgery as an example of a mixed metaphor.
Or you could just be a self righteous jerk on the internet, claiming superiority over all those people who don't conform to your specific flavour of intelligence.
It's possible that I could be, although most people who know me find me kinda charming, funny and self deprecating. And willing to run through walls for them. If I have a failing in this regard, it is not suffering bullshit.
And you know what? I tell them many of the things that I told you.They need to be careful. They need to realize that they are depending on someone else, and that they have to pay the price for that, and limit the number of things that can go wrong, like utilizing a cloud service in an era where cloud services aren't permanent. Oddly - or enlightening enough, instead of pissing them off, they understand that I have their back. They know I won't lie or bullshit them. A lot of clients have become personal friends. Anyhow, as it is clear that you are starting to dip into the ever classy name calling game, Good day sir.
Nope, just 99.9% of the internet population. If you think this is any different then you need a serious reality check.
The reality check is not on my part. If you don't want to do the work - you must pay the price. This means that sometimes you will get screwed in your estimation. That is reality. If you want to have control, you must exert control. Because if you don't have control, you might just lose public folder priveliges. This is not rocket science, it's just like how years ago my Mother in law used to get new mufflers every inspection until I took her car in and told them "Prove that her muffler went bad in 6 months."
I would. Some of the smartest people in the world are incapable in the world are incapable of complex IT solutions. Some of the most resourceful gatherers and providers of information are barely able to figure out how to log into an internet forum.
Then they pay the price, and are at the mercy of the providers who can figure this stuff out. Is that a difficult concept?
I'm not certain why this concept is so hard to grasp. If you rely on a business to do things like provide a public folder for your files, you simply have to put up with what they provide you with, or of course find another vendor. And if Dropbox tells you 4 years ago they are going to stop it, it isn't like you didn't know - you just weren't paying attention.
That's where the person who relies on others to do their work get in trouble. I'll bet a lot of people didn't bother to check on any notices given. Why? Because they might not have the acumen to do it. Or it wasn't important to them. Until it went away.
And the concept of using a dropbox public folder to link from a web page (someone in here mentioned that) is bizarre. If you have a web page, you have someone providing it. I suppose in these folks, they must have someone doing the web pages, why on earth would they link to a public dropbox instead of having links on their site that access a folder on their site? That's crazy. I've got hundreds of pdf files people need to access on my site, and not one of them is taking you away form the site, and they'll never go away unless I want them to. Probem solved.
Finally, if DropBox decides for financial or legal liability reasons they want to no longer have public folders, and gives customers 5 years to change, well, the customers should get another cloud vendor that provides public folders on their cloud, and have some person who knos this stuff change their links. Or of course, they could do something that makes more sense, like have a person who knows this stuff do a new site that makes sense.
"Rocket surgery?"
That's the real hard stuff - a combintion of Rocket science and brain surgery!
The researchers are not claiming that Vitamin D deficiency causes autism. They are claiming it increases the "Risk of Developing Autism", which is subtly different. Lots of chronic diseases and conditions are not so cut and dry as "Vitamin D deficiency causes Rickets".
Pedantics. The basis is the same. If more children become autistic among women who have a deficiency of Vitamin D, then there is the possibility of having women who get the proper amount having children who do not become autistic. Perhaps the lack of vitamin D does not specifically cause autism, but it might block what does specifically cause autism in a child who is predisposed.
Even with the moral questions ignored, it may be impossible to show a 1:1 causation between any single environmental factor and autism development, but we can potentially learn which factors can causally influence risk.
Sure. It's like the tobacco industry laywers argument - though not in the service of obvious evil.
But there is hardly any good reason to set out purposely deprive anyone fmor a proven nutrient, so what we do is take the moral yet roundabout method of a push for all people to address the lack of vitamin D since present day lifestyles and some people's genetic dispositions and locations do not match. As well, it is well documented that Vitamin D is a real problem today : https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p... https://www.cdc.gov/media/rele...
We know the effects of a lack of vitamin D, it is not in doubt. So that's where the moral problem of a controlled experiment comes into play. If the concept of vitamin D deficiency is related in some manner to development of autism, it is hard to come up with a moral way to deprive people of it.
The only possible moral experiment would be to have a recommendation that all women receive enough vitamin D, then take a control group who are specifically tested and monitored for proper Vitamin D levels, then comparing the autism rate of their offspring to the general public. It's not remotely perfect, but as noted, some of the most likely Vitamin D deficient people have a well documented and well deserved suspicion of human medical experimentation. It isn't paranoia when you can point to historical documents. I've no doubt that you can tell an American of African descent that she need to make certain she gets enough Vitamin D, but you will probably get a different reaction to asking her to be in a study, and "here - take these". People who have been purposefully infected with Veneraial diseases, and treated by being not treated, who have infected their wives and children (congenital syphilis) by race are perhaps not going to trust that approach.
Regardless, can you come up with a moral excuse for anyone to be deprived of Vitamins?
Please advise all the push here dummy internet users how they can setup their own server on their own HDD in their own home and control it themselves.
You instantly fail this challenge if it is more complicated than entering an email address, password, clicking upload, and then clicking share.
So it's like those bottom dwelling reality show people are who we must aim for?
I personally don't give a damn about people who's ability is capped at an email address, a Password1, and clicking on "share".
How many of those people you figure are sharing anything of worth? Memes?
Exactly how stupid do we need to get before deciding that breathing is too hard? How many of the least common denominator people do you think are paying for the service?
While I personally do no hold a Dropbox account, this decision pisses me off to no end just as much as it does their own users. When looking for rare content required for administering and managing legacy hardware and software, users have been hosting them on public Dropbox accounts.
It's too bad there is no other solution. Like maybe these people, who seem to have a web page, could store their files on their hosting service? My hosting service has all of my different files I need to distribute, and it can be as complex or as simple as I like. I have control of the files, and have local and site backup.
Yes, I pay for it - and despite some protestations by people who do pay for Dropbox, I'm certain that most of the butthurt minions are modern day "everything must be free!" people who have bought into the "free" cloud.
You get what you pay for.
Yeah I'm sure the run of the mill person is capable of that. It's amazing how detached from reality slashdot has become.
Well, if the run of the mill person is incapable and who we're aiming at, they have to pay a price for not wanting to learn, or not having the time. That's actually pretty simple supply and demand. If I host a cloud service, I make the rules. If I have to use Dropbox, I play by their rules.
And is it detached from reality to note that this stuff isn't exactly rocket surgery?
Unlike the child posters, I'll refrain from being an AC. If your process could be made derp-proof, I'd be all for it. Unfortunately, few non-geeks have the acumen to implement such a backup plan. The Cloud(tm) remains the only practical solution for most.
Then they put up with whatever their cloud provider makes them put up with. If you absolutely must have the cloud, and absolutely refuse to learn a few simple things, then you go with dropbox or some other, pay the bill, and do as they tell ya.
I can understand why people might be upset, but if not of the alternatives are acceptable to them, then looks like they just have to be upset.
I pay for my domain name, host all data on my server and back the server content encrypted to my home machine and to a friend of mine home machine. I never had any problems. I have always been puzzled by people trusting free services to host their important and even sometimes sensitive data.
I think there are a couple reasons - not good ones either.
Suits love the idea of the cloud, and there are people lined up to tell them what they like to hear. You can get rid of a lot of payroll, it's secure, it has a cool name, and nothing can go wrong, and we'll take care of all your backups, and by this time the suit needs a post-priandal cigarette.
And people who are just a little too trusting that the outfit the store their stuff on is going to be in business forever, is going to maintain the feature that they like forever, and that their cloud vendor actually gives a damn about them.
I'll bet it is more than just cost that causes this dropping of public folders. But regardless of the reasons, when you are a customer of some outfit that stores your stuff on their servers, you are just a customer, not a boss.
And you aren't concerned that a foreign country directly altered the outcome of an election here?
The Trump supporters are not. As long as they won, any way they did it was okay. And before I'm marked as Troll, read sexconker's post right below. He actually approves of other countries meddling in the US electoral process.
Technically, oil is created continuously.....just REALLY slowly.
And probably not in the amounts that would be useful any more.
If we were to get technical, the local lake that I go canoeing on would be producing coal eventually. Each summer it becomes full of vareious water lilies. The die back in the fall, and the vegetable matter sinks to the bottom ans slowly produces methane and compresses. The bubbles rise continously during the summer and fall, and a lot come up when I'm paddling in the shallow regions of the lake. The paddle scrapes against them and its a bubble blast. I wouldn't dare strike a flame at that point.
But if they do ever produce coal, it will be a thin little sliver. It is not at all likely that a Pennsylvanian age will ever repeat itself. The same is likely with oil creation.
It would be 'ethical' to find a population that's already deficient, then supplement half of them.
Okay, let me give you a few cites so that you know where I'm coming from.
https://sciencebasedmedicine.o...
There was a time when we had a pretty awful approach to medical experimentatino on humans. The Tuskegee syphilis experiment is one of the worst examples. There was another STD experiment called the Guatamalan syphilis Experiment. And by the way, given the nature of the experiments, good luck in getting cooperation from dark pigmented people as they have a well earned distrust of medical experimentation. And Black women in northern climates are probably the number one risk group.
You will probably really stand up for the experiments on children during the mid-1960's At the Willwbrook State School in Staten Island, a school for the mentally deficient, they intentionally injected children with Hepatitis in order to see if Gamma Globulin could cure it. That's pretty sweet and kindly.
http://ethics.iit.edu/eelibrar...
Anyhow, they rationalized it by declaring that since so many of the children became infected with Hep, it wasn't a big deal. Oddly enough, it was never made clear why they didn't test Gamma Globulin on the children who already contracted hepatitis.
In 1948 REsearchers gave over 800 pregnant women "vitamin drinks" that contained radioactive iron to examine the placental/ mother's blood transfer. At the Massachusetts based Walter E. Fernald State School, the AEC and Quaker Oats performed a experiment of given them oatmeal with radioactive Calcium in it to track digestion of Calcium. The students were told they were joining a science club.
There are a lot more, but when these abuses - and I seriously hope you would also consider them abuses, a lot of ethical concerns, and eventually ethics committees and regulations came into existence.
While there might be some clandestine stuff still going on, any program such as one that is aimed at studying autism causes is going to be closely studied for three reasons. One is that it's an obvious one, to possibly help children avoid becoming autistic. The second one is that it involves mothers and children at all, so it will have ahigh priority. The thirs is a bit of an embarrassment, because people who for some reason are heavily invested in the belief that vaccines cause autism, will want to debunk the experiments in any way possible. If you don't believe me, just look at what happened when they removed the original "cause of autism" th emerthiolate from vaccines, and it had no effect. So without any proof, the anti vaxxers just decided it was "something else".
Test it with existing data. If it's true, populations more likely to be vitamin D deficient (darker skins at higher latitudes) will already have higher autism rates. Do black folks in Chicago have higher autism rates than in the south? (Where we know the population migrated from, mostly less than 100 years ago.)
Data will be called racist, so compare dark skinned folks at different latitudes.
Good luck with African descent people to agree with any test like you suggest. They don't trust the medical profession in that way, and they have a good reason not to.
The only thing you've demonstrated in your rant here is that you don't give a shit about the concept of choice.
I'm sorry if that appeared as a rant to you. I was just trying to tell AC why I don't give a shit, and that at least one perosn isn't telling him "you don't get it". I have no particular involvement other than trying to help people understand.
Thanks to that attitude, the rest of the damn industry will now be following the obscenely profitable Apple model of take-it-and-like-it hardware design, with nothing but proprietary connections and zero upgrade capability across every device.
Well, I don't actually give a shit. I don't think profits are necessarily obscene either.
Had consumers not turned into mindless lemmings, we might still have common sense hardware designs like replaceable batteries that offer more than a $700 paperweight that prematurely ends up in a landfill.
I dunno, seems my iPhone 5 is keeping someone else happy now, at least if I wasn't lied to by the guy at Verizon. By the way, there is a weird disconnect between your idea that Apple is giving the stupid consumers no choice, but then demand that something you like is forced upon them. That's kinda wanting it both ways. You just want to force your idea of what is right upon people. And by the way - A battery in an iPhone is replaceable. Takes a little more effort, but the concept that they are not replaceable is wrong.
Don't assume this will stop with electronics either. At this fucking rate, your next car will come complete with non-removable tires. Enjoy the reaming from the capitalistic dick of greed, all because consumers don't give a shit.
Oh godness gracious! You accuse me of ranting and you finish up with this tidbit? Chillaxe, my good man.
If replaceable batteries and legacy headphone jacks are deal breakers, you have to determine why. I doubt it is stupidiy of the user. Having an iPhone 7, I can plug the corded headphones right into the phone. If for some reason I wanted to use the 10 dollar headphones that so many people mention as a wonderful reason to stick with an amdriod phone, I can plug them into the adapter, and plug that into the phone. This is where the "I don't give a shit" comes in. Either of those actions is ridiculously simple. Easier than typing out a sentence. The replacement battery? If you take care of your phone and battery, it shouldn't matter. When I traded in my Iphone 5, the battery was still working well. I needed no replacement battery.
So if the replaceable battery is a deabreaker then get a phone with one, and be happy. If the lack of a legacy headphone jack and the inconvenience of plugging the suppled headset into the thing or using the supplied adapter into the phone leaves you cold, then you need a phone with both a replaceable battery and a legacy phone jack.
But you shouldn't proclaim that everyone else is stupid because they don't subscribe to your pronouncements of how things should be. Seems like with a replaceable battery you should be able to keep your phone going forever, so no need to impose your will on everyone else who doesn't share it.
A plaintext password still exists in case the reader fails (and there are many reasons that it would).
Yup, I use fingerprint ID, and it pops up the password screen upon reboot.
Now wating for someone to start on about how someone can cut off my fingers and access my phone with it.
You say 'androids' in the same way the old school mac fanatics used to say 'IBM'.
I coulda said Windows phones too, but does anyone have them any more?
But do they give you free replacements?
Couldn't you just use a cup and string and be just as happy, though?
Nah, a cup and string doesn't have a headphone jack - so that's a deal breaker.
How on earth is it okay, in 2016, to store plaintext passwords for a file encryption tool?
Now that's a different question, and you are correct - it isn't okay. And it isn't actually okay to have it accessible before the thing finishes booting. My entire argument isn't that it is not a bad thing, just that it isn't a likely thing. And in any even, the issue has been repaired with an update, so only un-updated machines will be at risk. I kinda doubt many of those were encrypted anyhow. Fortunately, I've never had a reason to not update a Mac.