You realize those 2.32 billion monthly active users on Faceook aren't paying money to support the site, right? If Facebook put up a paywall and required subscriptions, that number would drop faster than stock values during the dot com crash.
YouTube didn't reach out and fix the issue until it gained a lot of attention and bad press. Even then, they did nothing toprevent it from happening again.
What happens to the next person who gets an extortion attempt like this and doesn't get a lot of press attention?
The species doesn't matter. The point of the article is that we've discovered that the spears used during that period were more accurate than we previously believed. That is a function of physics, not genetics.
Trumpâ(TM)s CFPB Fines a Man $1 For Swindling Veterans
This guy broke numerous laws while making predatory loans to veterans and, not only did he not get jail time, the amount of his fine was reduced to $1 when he said he couldn't afford it.
When poor people can't pay a traffic ticket or court fine, they go to jail. The wealthy and their cronies? They pay $1 and walk away.
The original concept of patents wasn't bad. They were meant to cover the tangible implementation of an idea and give the inventor a way to protect profits for a period (the first patent was 10 years) and then the information about the invention was released freely after the patent expired so that others could make duplicates and/or improve on it.
Of course it only took a few decades for people to start patenting stupid shit like salt. That lead to problems and a sort of patent reform in the 16th century that invalidated virtually all previously granted patents. After that, new inventions had to be novel and unique. For a while , patents worked reasonably well and helped drive the industrial revolution.
Sometime around the early 1800s, patents started being allowed for improvements to existing devices (not entirely a bad thing) and ideas that had no specific use (which was an entirely bad thing and is the basis for the patent trolls we suffer from today).
The late 1800s/early 1900s saw the rise of the use of patents to block competition and create monopolies. From there on, things have generally gone downhill with patents increasingly being granted for stupidly simple things like rounded corners, business models, software that does nothing special and overly broad patents.
We've pulled back a bit and the overly broad patents used by patent trolls have increasingly been being invalidated, but patents are still problematic. Still, the fundamental idea isn't a bad one. The problems primarily stem from the constant expansion of the scope of what can be patented.
(and yes, I've left out about a billion pages of details and significant moments in patent history, but I'm not writing a novel... there are lots of good websites that discuss the history of patents if you're interested in a more comprehensive history)
Research that cannot be duplicated, constant misrepresentation of facts or evidence, outright deception and money pandering.
Those aren't features of science becoming a religion. Those are features of a capitalist society where science is increasingly limited to for-profit organizations. "Publish or perish" policies, biased studies funded by groups with an agenda to push, pandering to big corporations for research funds... all of that is capitalism.
Now, if you want to argue that the belief that pure capitalism can actually work in real life is basically a religion based on no evidence whatsoever... well, there are a lot of good arguments in favor of doing so but it's too early in the morning for me to deal with the inevitable replies from whiny idiots who think all regulations are bad.
Well, for one thing, they actually hired third party studios to make those shows and movies for them. They did purchase ABQ Studios at the end of last year, which is probably a big part of why they joined the MPAA at this point.
Dear Wikipedia. Today we ask you to help us, the Wikipedia readers. To protect our independence, we'll never run ads if you link to our sites. We're sustained by shitty tech jobs paying barely more than a living wage. Only a tiny portion of the websites we view give us anything in return. If Wikipedia gave every reader $10, we could keep ourselves full of Taco Bell dollar menu foods for days to come. The price of a fucking expensive cup of coffee is all we need. If having readers is useful to you, please take one minute to dip into that $75 million cash reserve that you never mention when you're fundraising and help keep our waistlines growing. Thank you.
Slashdot Mirror
Film at 11!
Pedantry for the win!
I'm sure you could find A Modest Proposal if you looked around.
You'd have a better point of Tom Cruise's movies were tanking at the box office.
You realize those 2.32 billion monthly active users on Faceook aren't paying money to support the site, right? If Facebook put up a paywall and required subscriptions, that number would drop faster than stock values during the dot com crash.
Coincidentally, we value it exactly the same amount that the highest bidder does.
I was actually interested in what they were going to do with Typhoid Mary.
Pass me another can of pasteurized processed spray cheese food product so I can take myself out before it gets any worse.
I'm sure Ajit Pai will get right on that because he really cares about the consumers.
You'll never make a living as a cam whore with that attitude.
YouTube didn't reach out and fix the issue until it gained a lot of attention and bad press. Even then, they did nothing toprevent it from happening again.
What happens to the next person who gets an extortion attempt like this and doesn't get a lot of press attention?
Of all the problems with cell phones that you could have solved, the one you choose was "not enough unsolicited 3D dick pics"
Only a small percentage are secretly evil.
The rest are pretty open about it.
The species doesn't matter. The point of the article is that we've discovered that the spears used during that period were more accurate than we previously believed. That is a function of physics, not genetics.
Here's the non-fucked up link
https://theintercept.com/2019/...
This will really drive that point home:
Trumpâ(TM)s CFPB Fines a Man $1 For Swindling Veterans
This guy broke numerous laws while making predatory loans to veterans and, not only did he not get jail time, the amount of his fine was reduced to $1 when he said he couldn't afford it.
When poor people can't pay a traffic ticket or court fine, they go to jail. The wealthy and their cronies? They pay $1 and walk away.
The original concept of patents wasn't bad. They were meant to cover the tangible implementation of an idea and give the inventor a way to protect profits for a period (the first patent was 10 years) and then the information about the invention was released freely after the patent expired so that others could make duplicates and/or improve on it.
Of course it only took a few decades for people to start patenting stupid shit like salt. That lead to problems and a sort of patent reform in the 16th century that invalidated virtually all previously granted patents. After that, new inventions had to be novel and unique. For a while , patents worked reasonably well and helped drive the industrial revolution.
Sometime around the early 1800s, patents started being allowed for improvements to existing devices (not entirely a bad thing) and ideas that had no specific use (which was an entirely bad thing and is the basis for the patent trolls we suffer from today).
The late 1800s/early 1900s saw the rise of the use of patents to block competition and create monopolies. From there on, things have generally gone downhill with patents increasingly being granted for stupidly simple things like rounded corners, business models, software that does nothing special and overly broad patents.
We've pulled back a bit and the overly broad patents used by patent trolls have increasingly been being invalidated, but patents are still problematic. Still, the fundamental idea isn't a bad one. The problems primarily stem from the constant expansion of the scope of what can be patented.
(and yes, I've left out about a billion pages of details and significant moments in patent history, but I'm not writing a novel... there are lots of good websites that discuss the history of patents if you're interested in a more comprehensive history)
Research that cannot be duplicated, constant misrepresentation of facts or evidence, outright deception and money pandering.
Those aren't features of science becoming a religion. Those are features of a capitalist society where science is increasingly limited to for-profit organizations. "Publish or perish" policies, biased studies funded by groups with an agenda to push, pandering to big corporations for research funds... all of that is capitalism.
Now, if you want to argue that the belief that pure capitalism can actually work in real life is basically a religion based on no evidence whatsoever... well, there are a lot of good arguments in favor of doing so but it's too early in the morning for me to deal with the inevitable replies from whiny idiots who think all regulations are bad.
The larger studios contracting out work to smaller studios has nothing to do with whether or not Netflix is a production studio.
Until Netflix bought ABQ studios, they had no production facilities and were not a production studio.
Well, for one thing, they actually hired third party studios to make those shows and movies for them. They did purchase ABQ Studios at the end of last year, which is probably a big part of why they joined the MPAA at this point.
A tech journalist can't avoid the big tech companies due to their career depending on using the technology those companies produce.
Who would have thought?
Buy a dedicated GPS with lifetime map updates. The UI will stay the same as long as you only update the maps and don't upgrade the firmware.
Someone got probed by aliens on the wrong side of the bed this morning.
The TSA only limits liquids that you carry on board. You can put gallons of sunscreen in your checked luggage and they wouldn't care.
Dear Wikipedia. Today we ask you to help us, the Wikipedia readers. To protect our independence, we'll never run ads if you link to our sites. We're sustained by shitty tech jobs paying barely more than a living wage. Only a tiny portion of the websites we view give us anything in return. If Wikipedia gave every reader $10, we could keep ourselves full of Taco Bell dollar menu foods for days to come. The price of a fucking expensive cup of coffee is all we need. If having readers is useful to you, please take one minute to dip into that $75 million cash reserve that you never mention when you're fundraising and help keep our waistlines growing. Thank you.