It also makes sense since the Chinese value music education far more than Americans. They believe studying music develops good moral character and habits of thinking. Aside from sheer numbers, this is another reason there are so many Chinese in orchestras across the US.
This is not the first time warnings over the ability to store non-financial data within the blockchain have been issued. Interpol sent out an alert in 2015 saying that “the design of the blockchain means there is the possibility of malware being injected and permanently hosted with no methods currently available to wipe this data”.
The agency warned that the technology could be used in the “sharing of child sexual abuse images where the blockchain could become a safe haven for hosting such data”.
As I understand it, users agreed to the data access when they installed the 'app' to take the personality quiz. All that data was then improperly given to CA. Except for the part about the original user giving the data to a third party, this is what Facebook does for a living. Not at all unusual. And they have a team who explicitly sells the platform to political campaigns. So nothing new here other than a desire to fuss over everything having to do with Trump.
This is an old idea, and we've already seen an iteration of it. Likely there is a pendulum swing between individual effort and curation. I remember the early days of the Internet, when search engines basically sucked. Then along came Google, which was more relevant to an order of magnitude. Relevance, very similar to reputation. Back then I used to observe that given a flood of information of varying reliability, relevance (Or reputation if you will) becomes a valuable commodity. This was Google's early competitive advantage.
Like giving the ability to generate and print your return labels right on the site. I remember when they did that, why were all the competitors sitting on their hands? The story repeats itself many times. Amazon starts doing something and everyone asks why the established competitors never did it. I remember an interview with the then CEO of Best Buy some years ago, he was complaining that people used BB as a showroom to look at things and then went online to buy them. I thought if I were a stockholder I would immediately ask for his dismissal. Really, a businessman complaining that people come into the store? They still haven't done much to try to improve the experience and motivate people to buy there. It's not all about lowest price, especially if you can add value.
Just look at the Toys R Us story. They spent billions on stock buybacks in the late 90s instead of investing to stay competitive. I'm sorry for their employees, but the company *should* be closed down if that is the extent of their business acumen.
Hindsight is 20/20, but it is amazing that you would have to point out to a highly paid "business" executive that maybe there is a better use for billions of dollars than stock buybacks. If they had invested that billion in 1998 in ways to better compete in the future, who knows.
Ah I see your point. I'd be interested to see when each line of business became profitable in this sense, maybe someday I will go through the filings. Although if they weren't public the whole time that would be futile.
So what is your point? There's nothing here about profits. Take a look at their SEC filings, gross profit is positive for every major aspect of their business.
Amazon turns a huge profit. Just look at their SEC filings. There's a difference between gross profit and net profit. Many businesses, especially early on, use up their gross profit on capital investment, R&D, etc. They could stop doing that if they want and allocate the money into net profit, but investors typically don't care about that as much as growth.
This is shoddy reporting at best. Hiding behind the quotes on "block" is below cheap shot level. Where are the useful questions? Were any other sites affected? Did anyone take a traceroute anywhere? Why do any work when you can pull in clicks with a sensationalist headline and spurious conclusions?
It's just a sort of natural selection. The fake news which appeals to people's prejudices and desires is more appealing, and thus more likely to get forwarded. I'll bet there is tons of fake stuff which dies on the vine. Also, a lot of fake news is designed to specifically have that appeal, hence the term "clickbait." Meanwhile the truth is often quite prosaic, and doesn't often have that "zing" quality of proving us right all along.
Obviously there is a huge demand for affordable short term lodging in NYC. Instead of shooting the messenger and punishing homeowners, why not force traditional hotels to lower their rates? It is obviously their fault that rates are so high that people would rather use AirBNB instead.
That TunnelBear has sold to a major brand such as McAfee won't be greeted warmly by many of the product's existing users.
Nor should it be, McAfee will cease any meaningful development on it until it languishes far behind the alternatives. And support will get worse and worse.
Slashdot Mirror
It also makes sense since the Chinese value music education far more than Americans. They believe studying music develops good moral character and habits of thinking. Aside from sheer numbers, this is another reason there are so many Chinese in orchestras across the US.
Where's the "brain dead" part? No one is forcing anyone to attend the school or even work there.
This is not the first time warnings over the ability to store non-financial data within the blockchain have been issued. Interpol sent out an alert in 2015 saying that “the design of the blockchain means there is the possibility of malware being injected and permanently hosted with no methods currently available to wipe this data”. The agency warned that the technology could be used in the “sharing of child sexual abuse images where the blockchain could become a safe haven for hosting such data”.
As I understand it, users agreed to the data access when they installed the 'app' to take the personality quiz. All that data was then improperly given to CA. Except for the part about the original user giving the data to a third party, this is what Facebook does for a living. Not at all unusual. And they have a team who explicitly sells the platform to political campaigns. So nothing new here other than a desire to fuss over everything having to do with Trump.
Mesh computing, sprinkle the magic dust around the Oceania embassy and enjoy the spying goodness
Assholesomeness
This is an old idea, and we've already seen an iteration of it. Likely there is a pendulum swing between individual effort and curation. I remember the early days of the Internet, when search engines basically sucked. Then along came Google, which was more relevant to an order of magnitude. Relevance, very similar to reputation. Back then I used to observe that given a flood of information of varying reliability, relevance (Or reputation if you will) becomes a valuable commodity. This was Google's early competitive advantage.
Like giving the ability to generate and print your return labels right on the site. I remember when they did that, why were all the competitors sitting on their hands? The story repeats itself many times. Amazon starts doing something and everyone asks why the established competitors never did it. I remember an interview with the then CEO of Best Buy some years ago, he was complaining that people used BB as a showroom to look at things and then went online to buy them. I thought if I were a stockholder I would immediately ask for his dismissal. Really, a businessman complaining that people come into the store? They still haven't done much to try to improve the experience and motivate people to buy there. It's not all about lowest price, especially if you can add value.
Just look at the Toys R Us story. They spent billions on stock buybacks in the late 90s instead of investing to stay competitive. I'm sorry for their employees, but the company *should* be closed down if that is the extent of their business acumen.
Hindsight is 20/20, but it is amazing that you would have to point out to a highly paid "business" executive that maybe there is a better use for billions of dollars than stock buybacks. If they had invested that billion in 1998 in ways to better compete in the future, who knows.
Or why not put crappy old inventory on sale and let Toys R Us come over and buy all of it? Or purchase limits per customer?
As far as I can tell, Amazon is a logistics and service company. They feel they can apply their techniques to almost any product or service type.
Ah I see your point. I'd be interested to see when each line of business became profitable in this sense, maybe someday I will go through the filings. Although if they weren't public the whole time that would be futile.
So what is your point? There's nothing here about profits. Take a look at their SEC filings, gross profit is positive for every major aspect of their business.
Amazon turns a huge profit. Just look at their SEC filings. There's a difference between gross profit and net profit. Many businesses, especially early on, use up their gross profit on capital investment, R&D, etc. They could stop doing that if they want and allocate the money into net profit, but investors typically don't care about that as much as growth.
This is shoddy reporting at best. Hiding behind the quotes on "block" is below cheap shot level. Where are the useful questions? Were any other sites affected? Did anyone take a traceroute anywhere? Why do any work when you can pull in clicks with a sensationalist headline and spurious conclusions?
Huge companies already pay their way out of the "slow lane" by having more servers, larger pipes, and more CDNs.
A phone without a camera or microphone...
Apparently Binance had a risk management system which alerted on the abnormal activity and they were able to block it in time.
that could help advertisers keep track of your TV shows, books, and music habits
FTFY
They have the whole world to draw from, perhaps someone loaned it to them for a field test.
It's just a sort of natural selection. The fake news which appeals to people's prejudices and desires is more appealing, and thus more likely to get forwarded. I'll bet there is tons of fake stuff which dies on the vine. Also, a lot of fake news is designed to specifically have that appeal, hence the term "clickbait." Meanwhile the truth is often quite prosaic, and doesn't often have that "zing" quality of proving us right all along.
Obviously there is a huge demand for affordable short term lodging in NYC. Instead of shooting the messenger and punishing homeowners, why not force traditional hotels to lower their rates? It is obviously their fault that rates are so high that people would rather use AirBNB instead.
That's bearism and is not to be tolerated.
That TunnelBear has sold to a major brand such as McAfee won't be greeted warmly by many of the product's existing users.
Nor should it be, McAfee will cease any meaningful development on it until it languishes far behind the alternatives. And support will get worse and worse.