If you were genuinely so bored with the Internet that you couldn't care less whether you actually had it at all, it's unlikely you would have bothered to use such a system to express said belief. Really, what's stopping you from leaving already?
I'd say goodbye... it's the least I could do for a six-digit slashdot account holder, but I strongly suspect you'll be sticking around for a while.
Sorry but you can only make a 20% profit and yes we will audit the daylights out of you and by the way, you owning media companies is a conflict of interest and you must sell them all off.
I can sympathize with somebody who has done something in the past that they wish other people would forget about, but I can all to easily see the ramifications of implementing this leading well into historical negationism.
Honestly, the only thing I can think of that might qualify as really so "broken" that it simply needs replacing with something different is ipv4.
A replacement for that has been invented already, but nobody seems to want to use it. I can't imagine it would be any different with anything else people might try and point out about the internet that they think is broken would get any better public reception.
I'm less interested in actually learning about them than I am in understanding where people think that it's necessarily something that there are a plethora of ways that anyone could reasonably be able to accomplish.
All behavior is learned... just not necessarily from a person's parents.
If you don't think behavior is learned, guess what happens to babies who aren't given any stimulation whatsoever beyond being fed and kept only as clean as necessity may dictate?
And for what it's worth, some psycho actually did such an experiment in Europe a few centuries ago.... and if I'm remembering correctly,, he wanted to discover what language babies would learn to speak if they weren't exposed to social interaction. The answer is, of course... they don't learn any language. They die.
Everything that we do is learned... copied from somewhere, possibly mutated by our own imagination or combined with other things we have learned to perhaps produce entire original behavior, but in the end, it sill is all learned.
Most of those may obfuscate the caller, but not the source of the call. Calls from a pay phone for instance, will trace to that pay phone, which may or may not be helpful in finding who used the phone to commit the hoax but that phone is still the source of the call. The person to whom I had responded alleged there are "numerous" ways to obfuscate the source of a call.
If I did work for somebody under the agreement that they would pay me... and they decide to not pay me for the time that I've worked, aren't they stealing my time? That time is certainly not something I can get back, after all. The most I can do is hold back the work that I did as a hostage to get them to pay me, but that time is still gone. Forever.
I've heard that flying is particularly common for lucid dreaming... anytime I've become aware of being in a dream without waking up (which is usually what happens when I realize I am dreaming), I usually fly as well.
A degree is a signal... not a mark of obedience, but is much more of a breadth of knowledge than depth, while still indicating a certain minimum level of competency in field of focus. It's an indication that you have the ability to stretch your boundaries of knowledge beyond that of a merely a narrow field of focus and are likely to adapt well to a completely unknown future. I don't know what kind of schools you know of where people go to CS and learn to just follow orders, but where I went, the focus was on learning how to learn.... and if you just mindlessly did whatever you were told, you just might squeeze by first year, but I doubt you'd make it through second year without your GPA falling below acceptable levels, and blocking any further progress.
I'm not saying you should need a degree to be successful, but making up complete bullshit about it just because you managed to carve your own path to it does not make it worthless for other people.
What about the niqab, a scarf worn that completely obscured the entire face except for the eyes, most commonly worn by women who are Muslim? Are they proposing to eliminate religious freedom?
What about people who wear surgical-like masks in public when they have a mild cold, permitting them to freely go in public without significantly increasing the chance of spreading the illness? Are they going to make laws requiring people who are ill to stay at home, even if they are well enough to otherwise do their job, and compensate them for any wages that they lose?
What about wearing a scarf because it's cold outside? With a bad enough windchill in the wintertime, you need to completely cover up your face unless you want frostbite. Are they going to make laws prohibiting cold weather?
In many places, it's illegal to walk around naked in public too... so apparently there's plenty of precedent for making laws which might prohibit a certain fashion from being utilized in public, unless explicit exemptions are made for specific events.
We don't believe you should be tracked just because you want to walk outside and you shouldn't have to hide either.
This wording suggests (because of the usage of the words 'and' and 'either') that not hiding isn't merely a clarification of the previous statement about walking outside,but that some form of not hiding is in some way an alternative to not walking outside.
Your interpretation is certainly plausible, but I'm just going on what they actually said.
'We don't believe you should be tracked just because you want to walk outside and you shouldn't have to hide either. Instead, use one of our products to present an alternative identity when in public.'
So they don't want you to have to hide, and they propose as an alleged alternative (re: "instead") a product that they sell for precisely that purpose.
the compiler will only enable them if it can prove it doesn't happen. That is very much harder.
Yes... and here is where we enter into the kinds of optimizations that -O3 does with gcc.
Fortran compilers don't even try, however... with appropriate optimizations enabled, it always assume that it will never happen, unless you are explicitly using a union type, which almost invariably results in faster code, end will 99 times out a hundred exhibit the behavior that the code author expected, except in a case where different object pointers might overlap in their content, where the behavior is defined by the implementation and the author can exploit this fact to achieve certain techniques that more resemble assembly language optimization than high level coding. C allows this, Fortran does not... but allowing it comes as a performance cost.
Slashdot Mirror
If you were genuinely so bored with the Internet that you couldn't care less whether you actually had it at all, it's unlikely you would have bothered to use such a system to express said belief. Really, what's stopping you from leaving already?
I'd say goodbye... it's the least I could do for a six-digit slashdot account holder, but I strongly suspect you'll be sticking around for a while.
Would a TV cable company count as "media"?
What if the ISP *IS* also a cable company?
Really, why is the EU even considering this?
I can sympathize with somebody who has done something in the past that they wish other people would forget about, but I can all to easily see the ramifications of implementing this leading well into historical negationism.
A digital wallet like Square gives you the ability to accept credit card transactions, anywhere.
I have to say I'm rather disappointed that this appears to be going away, because I don't see any other alternatives to it on the immediate horizon.
Honestly, the only thing I can think of that might qualify as really so "broken" that it simply needs replacing with something different is ipv4.
A replacement for that has been invented already, but nobody seems to want to use it. I can't imagine it would be any different with anything else people might try and point out about the internet that they think is broken would get any better public reception.
If Square is going away, what else exists that allows a person to easily accept credit card transactions, anywhere, for all major types of cards?
Presumably such work wouldn't really qualify as "clean room" following the above poster's recommendation... hence the requirement for anonymity.
It wouldn't matter if it was... nobody else would be able to freely use the information.
I'm less interested in actually learning about them than I am in understanding where people think that it's necessarily something that there are a plethora of ways that anyone could reasonably be able to accomplish.
All behavior is learned... just not necessarily from a person's parents.
If you don't think behavior is learned, guess what happens to babies who aren't given any stimulation whatsoever beyond being fed and kept only as clean as necessity may dictate?
And for what it's worth, some psycho actually did such an experiment in Europe a few centuries ago.... and if I'm remembering correctly,, he wanted to discover what language babies would learn to speak if they weren't exposed to social interaction. The answer is, of course... they don't learn any language. They die.
Everything that we do is learned... copied from somewhere, possibly mutated by our own imagination or combined with other things we have learned to perhaps produce entire original behavior, but in the end, it sill is all learned.
Most of those may obfuscate the caller, but not the source of the call. Calls from a pay phone for instance, will trace to that pay phone, which may or may not be helpful in finding who used the phone to commit the hoax but that phone is still the source of the call. The person to whom I had responded alleged there are "numerous" ways to obfuscate the source of a call.
Like what? You said "numerous". Name three.
What about my time?
If I did work for somebody under the agreement that they would pay me... and they decide to not pay me for the time that I've worked, aren't they stealing my time? That time is certainly not something I can get back, after all. The most I can do is hold back the work that I did as a hostage to get them to pay me, but that time is still gone. Forever.
Starflight (both the original and sequel) was EA, and it was awesome.
Quite a bit more recent than PCS.
I wouldn't be surprised if the server binary probably runs on a unix server of some flavor.
They almost certainly won't... but he didn't say they would, he said they *should*.
I've heard that flying is particularly common for lucid dreaming... anytime I've become aware of being in a dream without waking up (which is usually what happens when I realize I am dreaming), I usually fly as well.
I wonder why that is.
A degree is a signal... not a mark of obedience, but is much more of a breadth of knowledge than depth, while still indicating a certain minimum level of competency in field of focus. It's an indication that you have the ability to stretch your boundaries of knowledge beyond that of a merely a narrow field of focus and are likely to adapt well to a completely unknown future. I don't know what kind of schools you know of where people go to CS and learn to just follow orders, but where I went, the focus was on learning how to learn.... and if you just mindlessly did whatever you were told, you just might squeeze by first year, but I doubt you'd make it through second year without your GPA falling below acceptable levels, and blocking any further progress.
I'm not saying you should need a degree to be successful, but making up complete bullshit about it just because you managed to carve your own path to it does not make it worthless for other people.
What about the niqab, a scarf worn that completely obscured the entire face except for the eyes, most commonly worn by women who are Muslim? Are they proposing to eliminate religious freedom?
What about people who wear surgical-like masks in public when they have a mild cold, permitting them to freely go in public without significantly increasing the chance of spreading the illness? Are they going to make laws requiring people who are ill to stay at home, even if they are well enough to otherwise do their job, and compensate them for any wages that they lose?
What about wearing a scarf because it's cold outside? With a bad enough windchill in the wintertime, you need to completely cover up your face unless you want frostbite. Are they going to make laws prohibiting cold weather?
There is a decided difference between what some may believe "should" happen and what actually does.
Bitching about it won't change a thing.
Everyone uses oxygen.
Not everyone wears masks in public.
In many places, it's illegal to walk around naked in public too... so apparently there's plenty of precedent for making laws which might prohibit a certain fashion from being utilized in public, unless explicit exemptions are made for specific events.
This wording suggests (because of the usage of the words 'and' and 'either') that not hiding isn't merely a clarification of the previous statement about walking outside,but that some form of not hiding is in some way an alternative to not walking outside.
Your interpretation is certainly plausible, but I'm just going on what they actually said.
That could logically extend to the use of make-up, you realize.
So they don't want you to have to hide, and they propose as an alleged alternative (re: "instead") a product that they sell for precisely that purpose.
Yes... and here is where we enter into the kinds of optimizations that -O3 does with gcc.
Fortran compilers don't even try, however... with appropriate optimizations enabled, it always assume that it will never happen, unless you are explicitly using a union type, which almost invariably results in faster code, end will 99 times out a hundred exhibit the behavior that the code author expected, except in a case where different object pointers might overlap in their content, where the behavior is defined by the implementation and the author can exploit this fact to achieve certain techniques that more resemble assembly language optimization than high level coding. C allows this, Fortran does not... but allowing it comes as a performance cost.