You would need admin access to make the change in the first place, this is just a persistence mechanism. There are so many others it is no surprise this one isn't seeing any use.
the ability for users to restrict extensions' access to a custom list of sites
To me that is the most interesting thing in there. Abusive extensions are an understated problem IMHO, more so than HTTP/HTTPS. It's a step in the right direction at least, although the biggest problem remains since extensions might 'need' wide permissions and nothing exists to stop them from abusing that.
Also, the core document plus amendments is not the whole of the Constitution, there is also the entire body of legal precedent. The UK has no written Constitution as a central document, their whole thing is various traditions and precedents.
So true, I once worked for a hospital with no 2F on the remote access system, and the head of the ER department used his last name as his password, and refused to change it.
And yes, I do see parallel roads. During holidays, out of state GPS users jam pack the state turnpike while locals all know to use the parallel route 295
Originally turnpikes and highways were built by private funding, i.e. some corporation was formed and people who felt the project was beneficial bought shares. In many cases, there was little expectation of real returns from the shares. The original NJ Turnpike for example. The Suez canal was built by private investment also (I think the French gov't was a large minority shareholder), that was a huge project, though technically not a road. I would agree, though, that the parent's implication that private ownership would somehow avoid the problem in this article is a daft notion, as anyone who uses the Internet knows.
I wonder about this when I see an actor in a wheelchair in a role that isn't specifically written for such. It shouldn't be a this way, but my first thought is always "they hired that actor just to get kudos for hiring someone in a wheelchair." It's a natural thought given how we obsess over diversity and equality. Then I wonder how do we get over all of it to the desired state of finding the actor in a wheelchair unremarkable?
How can a company hope to compete with Google's driverless cars when it spends $20 billion a year to ensure it has the best..
How has this happened in the past? In some cases, the big competitor becomes a dead weight bureaucracy and smaller competitors gain the advantage. Or a new technology removes the advantage. Or, for instance, where does Uber get all its money?
I get free Microsoft support pre-emptively calling me all the time when I have a virus. I just give them remote admin access to my PC and they fix it right up.
There's nothing in here about the Internet "splitting". All it amounts to is that China is already using the Internet a lot and most Americans know nothing about it because they can't read Chinese. They are going to use their own sites and services instead of running to use companies like Google.
Another DUH is that government officials in other countries can all say the say same thing, where "state-backed hackers" refers to US intelligence agencies among others.
A good point. I was just thinking, there must be something else going on here. The discounts can't be very big since the whole point of insurance is that non-claimants pay the premiums to cover the less numerous claimants. If you keep lowering premiums for the lower risk categories, where does the money to pay out claims come from?
They will cover tuition, but what about all the other costs? Not covered unless your family is below that $65k mark. I wonder if they found that they still make a nice profit on the room and board, etc.
That is true, but it leaves out the fact that federal revenue is not just income tax. And the rich aren't paying the lions share of those other sources. Plus all the borrowing, which is essentially just taxing poor people through inflation.
Slashdot Mirror
You would need admin access to make the change in the first place, this is just a persistence mechanism. There are so many others it is no surprise this one isn't seeing any use.
the ability for users to restrict extensions' access to a custom list of sites
To me that is the most interesting thing in there. Abusive extensions are an understated problem IMHO, more so than HTTP/HTTPS. It's a step in the right direction at least, although the biggest problem remains since extensions might 'need' wide permissions and nothing exists to stop them from abusing that.
Also, the core document plus amendments is not the whole of the Constitution, there is also the entire body of legal precedent. The UK has no written Constitution as a central document, their whole thing is various traditions and precedents.
So true, I once worked for a hospital with no 2F on the remote access system, and the head of the ER department used his last name as his password, and refused to change it.
And yes, I do see parallel roads. During holidays, out of state GPS users jam pack the state turnpike while locals all know to use the parallel route 295
Originally turnpikes and highways were built by private funding, i.e. some corporation was formed and people who felt the project was beneficial bought shares. In many cases, there was little expectation of real returns from the shares. The original NJ Turnpike for example. The Suez canal was built by private investment also (I think the French gov't was a large minority shareholder), that was a huge project, though technically not a road. I would agree, though, that the parent's implication that private ownership would somehow avoid the problem in this article is a daft notion, as anyone who uses the Internet knows.
They are also collecting photos of me making an obscene gesture at every one of these signs I pass.
I wonder about this when I see an actor in a wheelchair in a role that isn't specifically written for such. It shouldn't be a this way, but my first thought is always "they hired that actor just to get kudos for hiring someone in a wheelchair." It's a natural thought given how we obsess over diversity and equality. Then I wonder how do we get over all of it to the desired state of finding the actor in a wheelchair unremarkable?
How can a company hope to compete with Google's driverless cars when it spends $20 billion a year to ensure it has the best ..
How has this happened in the past? In some cases, the big competitor becomes a dead weight bureaucracy and smaller competitors gain the advantage. Or a new technology removes the advantage. Or, for instance, where does Uber get all its money?
You have the same relationship with almost any of the auto-updates sources you likely have enabled, regardless of OS.
Well, correction, they do cater to, and care about, users who aren't the small minority who complain on /.
You can do the same thing with Windows Firewall, only allow chrome.exe access to the default gateway for example.
I get free Microsoft support pre-emptively calling me all the time when I have a virus. I just give them remote admin access to my PC and they fix it right up.
There's nothing in here about the Internet "splitting". All it amounts to is that China is already using the Internet a lot and most Americans know nothing about it because they can't read Chinese. They are going to use their own sites and services instead of running to use companies like Google.
Another DUH is that government officials in other countries can all say the say same thing, where "state-backed hackers" refers to US intelligence agencies among others.
A good point. I was just thinking, there must be something else going on here. The discounts can't be very big since the whole point of insurance is that non-claimants pay the premiums to cover the less numerous claimants. If you keep lowering premiums for the lower risk categories, where does the money to pay out claims come from?
I've mentioned before, the real danger of a dystopian panopticon future comes from insurance companies, not governments.
That's really interesting, thanks. I would not have thought to look at their website for a cost breakdown.
They will cover tuition, but what about all the other costs? Not covered unless your family is below that $65k mark. I wonder if they found that they still make a nice profit on the room and board, etc.
Maybe he meant "chain gang" not "blockchain"
I looked up how much of federal intake is income taxes, according to this it is 47% (2016)
That is true, but it leaves out the fact that federal revenue is not just income tax. And the rich aren't paying the lions share of those other sources. Plus all the borrowing, which is essentially just taxing poor people through inflation.
This is just the Chinese again, using their crypto-coins to buy presents and moon cakes for the big Mid-Autumn Festival in two weeks.
database of copyrighted works
GREAT! All I need to do is start a website and I can get a digital copy of every copyrighted work for free from this database. No more torrents!
All I really meant was the hardware interface....