Enterprise procurement works the same, is the point. The decision makers for very large purchases don't understand the technology, but they do understand feature checklists.
They should probably live in a state where the rules are different, so that it says "female" on their ID.
Gee, it's almost as if state's rights are a good idea, so that people can move to states that match their culture, rather than a homogeny enforced by the likes of Trump.
California law, so California's definition is what matters.
That's the thing about state's rights - it lets you have different rules in different places. OTOH, the more powerful the federal government, the more it will matter what Trump thinks.
. Sex is biological and not always unambiguous. People are born with ambiguous genital attributes
You're talking about something like one in a million people. Governments needs to optimize for the common case, not the one in a million case.
Some people are biologically toward one end of the scale and emotionally on the other. Forcing them to conform is just as idiotic
Asking someone to overcome mental illness with will power is like asking someone with a broken leg to "walk it off". I think most people get that. The complaint is asking the mainstream to make way for the corner cases. Even though that's sometimes the morally correct choice, it's often unpopular.
IE was pushing weird non standard standards on the web
So just like Chrome then. But that has nothing to do with monopolistic practices.
Youtube doesn't seem to be trying to kill Vimeo or other competitors, works on most all platforms and doesn't seem important. It it only worked on the Chrome browser and Google was using patents or such to deny competition, you might have a point.
I frequently find YouTube doesn't work for me on Firefox, especially on Ubuntu where about 1 in 3 won't play.
But my point was that Google cheated to create YouTube, resulting in the current landscape of YouTube dominance. They may also be abusing their monopoly of YouTube to do further evil, sure, but I doubt to a degree that it's illegal.
People with gender dysphoria should be treated for their mental disorder in a different way than sex 'reassignment'./quote>
To be fair, hormones are the only drugs we have to treat gender dysphoria. It's not like we're doing that instead of working psychiatric drugs. Still, it's a terrible treatment given the immense suicide rate for people who have had the surgeries. It a treatment with a 60% 10-year survival rate, IIRC (due to suicide), clearly not good enough.
It's a good thing conversion therapy is illegal in California. Oh, wait, it's only the other kind of conversion therapy that's illegal, not this kind.
Conservatives: "We want personal liberties, get the government out of our lives, freedom!"
Also Conservatives: "Thank god we have the Government telling people how they are allowed to identify themselves."
The government isn't telling people how they can identify themselves. They are setting down how people will be identified by the government. Since there are no mandatory federal IDs in the US, I'm not sure how much it matters to people who work for tech companies, not the government. Might be annoying for passports, I guess (though you won't get much sympathy for how other countries treat US citizens at the border, given the reverse).
America must be doing awesome if THAT is the problem the president keeps himself busy with.
We are, thanks.
Trump has done very little to appease the social conservative side of his base. He hasn't built any walls, and it's not like his choice of Pence as VP actually affects anything. Still, I'm surprised he's doing even this much: the Bushes did nothing beyond saying conservative things from the podium, and they still got the so-con votes. Trump himself is far from so-con, so this is clearly political horse-trading.
I woudn't think this would be his priority either. I wonder what he's getting in trade.
Not yet. IE wasn't either, though, the problem was it was bundled with Windows. Using one monopoly to create another is illegal. MS was abusing its OS monopoly to give away IE for free. Google was abusing it's search monopoly to give away YouTube content for free (YouTube pays for itself these days, but not then).
Workstation is... not entirely useless for gaming. You'll find vastly more games that will work with SteamPlay directly on Linux, but that only helps for Steam games, no Blizzard or EA or other distribution platforms.
Extremist right wing terrorism is the biggest extant terrorist threat in the US today, which is both enabled and fermented by political platforms like Gab.ai. That Apple, Microsoft, Google, Samsung, GoDaddy, Stripe, Medium etc etc have all been unwilling to handle the foul stench of Gab.ai says more about Gab.ai than about "social media platforms"
The solution to bad speech is always "more speech". Making something forbidden is a very bad strategy for keeping young men away from it!
In any case, it's just as illegal for a monopoly to destroy a potential competitor you dislike as it is to destroy one you like.
YouTube is a monopoly in it's market, just as Windows was a monopoly at Apple's nadir, when the lawsuits over bundling IE happened. At the time Google was propping up YouTube, Google was had a monopoly on search. You don't legally have to be the only possible provider, just sufficiently dominate the market.
Selling products at a loss isn't necessarily a problem in the US, but using a monopoly in one area to create a monopoly in another very much is.
Pretty well. At it's peak Standard Oil controlled somewhere around 90% of all oil production and sales in the US
Exxon is the legacy of Standard Oil. (SO -> Esso -> Exxon) It still dominates US-owned oil production and sales. We have real competition only because of foreign competitors, each of which dominates oil in its country.
The reason you have a lot of the choices you do is precisely because AT&T was broken up.
AT&T is my only choice for ISP, or landline phone service for that matter. Well done.
Things got better for a while when each of those were broken up. Competition flourished for a few years. Then everyone got bought up again.
YouTube is effectively a monopoly, and got that way by being run at a loss for years, subsidized by Googles monopoly on search. That's exactly the sort of thing anti-trust laws are there to stop.
The takedown of Gab.ai by the social media oligopoly is very worrying from an anti-trust point of view. "Interlocking directorates" may be a thing of the past, but they seemingly aren't needed for coordinated action by the oligarchy to destroy a competitor. A month ago, I was on the side of "yeah,they dominate the market, but they're not hindering competition". Well, that sure changed.
You're about 5 years out of date, I think. Flash is mostly dead, IE is mostly dead, ActiveX is long dead (outside of corporate intranets, where it may linger). It's all about the browser and JS exploits now.
Of course, XSS is big too, and technically you don't need JS for that, so I'm with you there. There have only been a handful of media exploits (and mostly from the Snowden leaks - they're quite valuable).
Sure turn off Javascript for your random browsing, but if you are going to a site, where your personal info and needs to log into with... Then you might as well have it enabled. Because your data is already compromised,
Fun fact: web sites often contain content originating from more than one company. You might trust the people you're giving your info to, but is there an ad anywhere on their web site? Heck, even banks run web content from "partners" these days.
"It was hidden from us just because we didn't sample it right." This must have been the last remaining sampling error and from now on the science is settled.
The warming was on double-secret probation!... do Millennials even get that reference? Seems like half the common geek cultural reference bank is unknown to half the geeks these days.
Both, I think. I'll admit my my knowledge prehistoric Scotland is pretty limited, but the forests took a real hit when bronze age people arrived ~2000 BC. Apparently, about half of the forests has been cleared when the Romans arrived.
In any case it's only been in the past century or so that it's gone the other direction, and of course modern groups are working hard to restore the forest there.
And as we're seeing, conservatives are the ones abusing government power.
Indeed. Left or right, you should want a smaller government, because there's always someone who will abuse whatever power you give them. The only true defense is giving them less power.
Any power you give a currently-OK government to solve some problem will eventually be used against you unfairly and maliciously by the next evil man who ends up in charge. Make sure it's worth it.
or am I supposed to imagine that none of that work happened? That presentations I created on the iPad do not exist? It's absurd for you to claim that you can only use an iPad for watching video when so many people are doing real work.
The mind-control properties of Apple products are well-established in the literature. You're in "Stage 3", where the hallucinations come. It's probably too late for you once the reality-distortion field has you this far gone.
The CEO of a consulting firm I worked for uses nothing but an iPad for all work
Confirming my point that you can't do anything useful with one.
Sure, there were some people protesting because of what you said, but there were also "green" organizations involved who like to block progress on general principles.
I wouldn't call them anti-science so much as anti-progress of any type.
Indeed: they are anti-science because they are anti-progress.
It blows my mind that such people can thing of themselves as "green". Bronze-age farmers clear-cut forests for farmland everywhere they lived. E.g., the Scottish highlands used to be heavily forested, but were almost entirely clear-cut. Meanwhile, thanks to progress, US forested area increased dramatically in the last hundred years. Even though it's a mix worldwide (third world nations are still clear-cutting in some places), worldwide forest corverage has increased more than 7% since the 1980s.
Progress makes life better. That's why we call it progress.
Every tool you build, your opponent will use against you. Google and facebook are creating a lot of tools to "fight the alt-right", but when trump gets his orange hands on em, well it won't be pretty.
Indeed. The left always wants more government. This is what "more government" looks like. This sort of thing is exactly why forward-looking people want to reduce the current size of government!
(And before anyone types "Somalia", there a lot of room to reduce our current government and still have a large government.)
Nope. It's a tablet, therefore useless for anything but watching video. Simple truth of the universe. I get that you can turn it into a laptop by adding all the other pieces a laptop has, but at that point it's a laptop.
Slashdot Mirror
Enterprise procurement works the same, is the point. The decision makers for very large purchases don't understand the technology, but they do understand feature checklists.
They should probably live in a state where the rules are different, so that it says "female" on their ID.
Gee, it's almost as if state's rights are a good idea, so that people can move to states that match their culture, rather than a homogeny enforced by the likes of Trump.
California law, so California's definition is what matters.
That's the thing about state's rights - it lets you have different rules in different places. OTOH, the more powerful the federal government, the more it will matter what Trump thinks.
. Sex is biological and not always unambiguous. People are born with ambiguous genital attributes
You're talking about something like one in a million people. Governments needs to optimize for the common case, not the one in a million case.
Some people are biologically toward one end of the scale and emotionally on the other. Forcing them to conform is just as idiotic
Asking someone to overcome mental illness with will power is like asking someone with a broken leg to "walk it off". I think most people get that. The complaint is asking the mainstream to make way for the corner cases. Even though that's sometimes the morally correct choice, it's often unpopular.
IE was pushing weird non standard standards on the web
So just like Chrome then. But that has nothing to do with monopolistic practices.
Youtube doesn't seem to be trying to kill Vimeo or other competitors, works on most all platforms and doesn't seem important. It it only worked on the Chrome browser and Google was using patents or such to deny competition, you might have a point.
I frequently find YouTube doesn't work for me on Firefox, especially on Ubuntu where about 1 in 3 won't play.
But my point was that Google cheated to create YouTube, resulting in the current landscape of YouTube dominance. They may also be abusing their monopoly of YouTube to do further evil, sure, but I doubt to a degree that it's illegal.
People with gender dysphoria should be treated for their mental disorder in a different way than sex 'reassignment'./quote>
To be fair, hormones are the only drugs we have to treat gender dysphoria. It's not like we're doing that instead of working psychiatric drugs. Still, it's a terrible treatment given the immense suicide rate for people who have had the surgeries. It a treatment with a 60% 10-year survival rate, IIRC (due to suicide), clearly not good enough.
It's a good thing conversion therapy is illegal in California. Oh, wait, it's only the other kind of conversion therapy that's illegal, not this kind.
Conservatives: "We want personal liberties, get the government out of our lives, freedom!"
Also Conservatives: "Thank god we have the Government telling people how they are allowed to identify themselves."
The government isn't telling people how they can identify themselves. They are setting down how people will be identified by the government. Since there are no mandatory federal IDs in the US, I'm not sure how much it matters to people who work for tech companies, not the government. Might be annoying for passports, I guess (though you won't get much sympathy for how other countries treat US citizens at the border, given the reverse).
America must be doing awesome if THAT is the problem the president keeps himself busy with.
We are, thanks.
Trump has done very little to appease the social conservative side of his base. He hasn't built any walls, and it's not like his choice of Pence as VP actually affects anything. Still, I'm surprised he's doing even this much: the Bushes did nothing beyond saying conservative things from the podium, and they still got the so-con votes. Trump himself is far from so-con, so this is clearly political horse-trading.
I woudn't think this would be his priority either. I wonder what he's getting in trade.
YouTube isn't doing anything similar.
Not yet. IE wasn't either, though, the problem was it was bundled with Windows. Using one monopoly to create another is illegal. MS was abusing its OS monopoly to give away IE for free. Google was abusing it's search monopoly to give away YouTube content for free (YouTube pays for itself these days, but not then).
Workstation is ... not entirely useless for gaming. You'll find vastly more games that will work with SteamPlay directly on Linux, but that only helps for Steam games, no Blizzard or EA or other distribution platforms.
Extremist right wing terrorism is the biggest extant terrorist threat in the US today, which is both enabled and fermented by political platforms like Gab.ai. That Apple, Microsoft, Google, Samsung, GoDaddy, Stripe, Medium etc etc have all been unwilling to handle the foul stench of Gab.ai says more about Gab.ai than about "social media platforms"
The solution to bad speech is always "more speech". Making something forbidden is a very bad strategy for keeping young men away from it!
In any case, it's just as illegal for a monopoly to destroy a potential competitor you dislike as it is to destroy one you like.
YouTube is a monopoly in it's market, just as Windows was a monopoly at Apple's nadir, when the lawsuits over bundling IE happened. At the time Google was propping up YouTube, Google was had a monopoly on search. You don't legally have to be the only possible provider, just sufficiently dominate the market.
Selling products at a loss isn't necessarily a problem in the US, but using a monopoly in one area to create a monopoly in another very much is.
Pretty well. At it's peak Standard Oil controlled somewhere around 90% of all oil production and sales in the US
Exxon is the legacy of Standard Oil. (SO -> Esso -> Exxon) It still dominates US-owned oil production and sales. We have real competition only because of foreign competitors, each of which dominates oil in its country.
The reason you have a lot of the choices you do is precisely because AT&T was broken up.
AT&T is my only choice for ISP, or landline phone service for that matter. Well done.
Things got better for a while when each of those were broken up. Competition flourished for a few years. Then everyone got bought up again.
YouTube is effectively a monopoly, and got that way by being run at a loss for years, subsidized by Googles monopoly on search. That's exactly the sort of thing anti-trust laws are there to stop.
The takedown of Gab.ai by the social media oligopoly is very worrying from an anti-trust point of view. "Interlocking directorates" may be a thing of the past, but they seemingly aren't needed for coordinated action by the oligarchy to destroy a competitor. A month ago, I was on the side of "yeah,they dominate the market, but they're not hindering competition". Well, that sure changed.
You're about 5 years out of date, I think. Flash is mostly dead, IE is mostly dead, ActiveX is long dead (outside of corporate intranets, where it may linger). It's all about the browser and JS exploits now.
Of course, XSS is big too, and technically you don't need JS for that, so I'm with you there. There have only been a handful of media exploits (and mostly from the Snowden leaks - they're quite valuable).
Sure turn off Javascript for your random browsing, but if you are going to a site, where your personal info and needs to log into with... Then you might as well have it enabled. Because your data is already compromised,
Fun fact: web sites often contain content originating from more than one company. You might trust the people you're giving your info to, but is there an ad anywhere on their web site? Heck, even banks run web content from "partners" these days.
"It was hidden from us just because we didn't sample it right." This must have been the last remaining sampling error and from now on the science is settled.
The warming was on double-secret probation! ... do Millennials even get that reference? Seems like half the common geek cultural reference bank is unknown to half the geeks these days.
Both, I think. I'll admit my my knowledge prehistoric Scotland is pretty limited, but the forests took a real hit when bronze age people arrived ~2000 BC. Apparently, about half of the forests has been cleared when the Romans arrived.
In any case it's only been in the past century or so that it's gone the other direction, and of course modern groups are working hard to restore the forest there.
And as we're seeing, conservatives are the ones abusing government power.
Indeed. Left or right, you should want a smaller government, because there's always someone who will abuse whatever power you give them. The only true defense is giving them less power.
Any power you give a currently-OK government to solve some problem will eventually be used against you unfairly and maliciously by the next evil man who ends up in charge. Make sure it's worth it.
or am I supposed to imagine that none of that work happened? That presentations I created on the iPad do not exist? It's absurd for you to claim that you can only use an iPad for watching video when so many people are doing real work.
The mind-control properties of Apple products are well-established in the literature. You're in "Stage 3", where the hallucinations come. It's probably too late for you once the reality-distortion field has you this far gone.
The CEO of a consulting firm I worked for uses nothing but an iPad for all work
Confirming my point that you can't do anything useful with one.
Sure, there were some people protesting because of what you said, but there were also "green" organizations involved who like to block progress on general principles.
I wouldn't call them anti-science so much as anti-progress of any type.
Indeed: they are anti-science because they are anti-progress.
It blows my mind that such people can thing of themselves as "green". Bronze-age farmers clear-cut forests for farmland everywhere they lived. E.g., the Scottish highlands used to be heavily forested, but were almost entirely clear-cut. Meanwhile, thanks to progress, US forested area increased dramatically in the last hundred years. Even though it's a mix worldwide (third world nations are still clear-cutting in some places), worldwide forest corverage has increased more than 7% since the 1980s.
Progress makes life better. That's why we call it progress.
Every tool you build, your opponent will use against you.
Google and facebook are creating a lot of tools to "fight the alt-right", but when trump gets his orange hands on em, well it won't be pretty.
Indeed. The left always wants more government. This is what "more government" looks like. This sort of thing is exactly why forward-looking people want to reduce the current size of government!
(And before anyone types "Somalia", there a lot of room to reduce our current government and still have a large government.)
Nope. It's a tablet, therefore useless for anything but watching video. Simple truth of the universe. I get that you can turn it into a laptop by adding all the other pieces a laptop has, but at that point it's a laptop.
I guess it is if Facebook is taking no measures at all: they should at least make fraud hard. But ultimately no business can entirely prevent fraud
There is a difference between not being able to prevent all fraud and making no real effort to prevent ANY fraud
Why did you reply to my post to sat the same thing I said, in almost the same words?