Because as I understand the term, while certainly mischievous, I don't understand how it would necessarily increase the likelihood of one particular election result that I would ordinarily assume to be the case with actual election interference.
Are you suggesting that Apple doesn't already prevent installation of applications on an iPhone unless they're from the store
There are ways around that is what I'm saying... at least two that come to mind, and for at least one of them, short of not allowing independent developers to write apps for the iPhone at all, there is nothing that Apple can do to stop it.
Perhaps it has evaded your notice that is entirely possible to distribute apps without using those app stores... and while it's true that this would exclude a majority of people, as more and more less technically inclined people find out about a useful application's existence, its popularity will rise even without an official distribution channel. Maybe it won't reach ever a majority, but it sure as heck could be a statistically significant percentage of the population.
Systemically, there's absolutely no way that they can block this. The only hurdle for the technical person is to lower the technical threshold requirements to the point that anyone can do it, or at least anyone with access to the right kind of computer.
... and mine is that this doesn't matter, because the barrier is too high for those non-technical-background people to get over
It is that very barrier that I am saying that people with the right skills and expertise have a way of lowering.... for everybody. Historically, this has always been the case in computing. Experts figure out how to do something they find useful.... they make it easier and easier to do and eventually the threshold of difficulty is low enough that practically anyone can do it.
As for the "nothing to hide" argument , of course people have something to hide.
True... in fact, if I ever met somebody who tried to present this rationale, I would ask why they are wearing clothes right now.
Everybody has things to hide.... not because they have necessarily done anything wrong, but because some things are simply private.
And that's not even considering the inescapable fact that even *IF* you give the government the benefit of the doubt that they have only the purest and most noble intentions for accessing your private data, if they can access it, then so can the bad guys.... you know, the people that law enforcement is supposed to protect you from?
This makes law enforcement's job *harder*, not easier... since they would now they need to do that much more policing to protect absolutely everybody from people that might to misappropriate your data just because the government has access to it.
They don't care if a few ubergeeks figure out ways around. There aren't enough people like that to matter in the big picture.
Thanks to the distibutive capabilities of the internet, there are.... specifically, if only a couple of experts figure out ways around and happen to publish, then everybody has access to that method...
So they can go right on ahead and arrest people who came up with what amounts to a math proof.
Often a LEGO Discovery Centre will have "adult night" venues from time to time. Visit your nearest one and ask them when the next one will be... you probably won't have to wait more than a month or two.
And the pressure of being forced to produce your password or be put in jail for not producing it only makes it worse so that you can't accurately remember it? While certain types of meds might alleviate some of that if everything goes according to planned expectations, it could just as easily make things even worse.
But I will take more usable daylight over correctness of noon
Would you rather take more usable daylight in the evening over the health benefits of having at least some sunshine exposure at the start of each day?
Besides, with the system we have now, "noon" is wrong half the year already and it doesn't cause any issue that I know about.
I would suggest that is only because being wrong half of the time is still better than being wrong all of the time. If it is wrong all of the time, and 1PM is defined as the permanent midday, then there's no point in considering noon to be a post meridiem time at all.
Human beings have long since evolved, however inconvenient it might be to modern business or to evening recreation, to function best during daylight hours, it makes sense that our time keeping practices should reflect that.
Except those living north of about 45 degrees, sure...
You see, in the summer time, the sun already sets quite late anyways, and DST is not really required to give an extra hour of daylight. While in the winter the does indeed set a lot earlier and an extra hour of daylight at the end of the day could be nice, the sun also rises that much later as well, and any hours you add to the evening take away from the hours of daylight you get in the morning.
And do not fail to consider the well documented health advantages that exist with starting your work day in the sunshine, even if you spend the bulk of it indoors. Pushing the clocks ahead an hour and leaving them there year around would mean that the states bordering Canada would not see a sunrise until 9AM or possibly even later in the middle of wintertime, and you would almost certainly see a sharp uptick in seasonal depression disorder, not to mention creating additional hazards for school-aged children who walk to school having to do so in the dark. The impact in Canada, which would likely imitate the timekeeping practices of the USA, as well in Alaska would be even worse.
Noon (12PM) should be in the middle of the day, not an hour before it. Otherwise calling PM at all is a complete misnomer.
How about the possibility of just wanting to put your best foot forward and not ignore the possibility that getting even that half hour jump start on the work day while you are waiting for your commute to be over, when you are otherwise entirely unproductive anyways, can help to make the rest of the day a little bit stressful?
Sure.... *MAYBE* it will, but I said that there *ARE* no real alternatives to Google Maps, primarily on account of Google Map's ground-level views that are linked directly to the overhead map. That's a present tense assertion. The fact that there are some projects that are making headway which *MIGHT* eventually get there at some point in the future is entirely independent of that.
That said, I'm not holding my breath.... Exhaustive ground level views sides of virtually every road in every major city around the world, including photos of what was off to the sides, took Google years to accumulate, and that was *WITH* corporate backing to make it materialize. And as I said about Mapillary and OpenStreetCam, neither of these even has any views from the ground that are anything other than the direction the vehicle is travelling, which does not really help you know what a particular locations looks like when you actually get there... a core facility of Street View that without it, would make it virtually useless.
I'll concede that Street View isn't nearly as helpful as I usually find it if there are somewhat recent developments in the area and the photos are too old, but in my experience that is relatively infrequently. It happens sometimes, sure... but not so often as to actually impact the overall usefulness of the facility or incline me to not even bother with it, as I can say right now is definitely the case for both of the alternatives mentioned above.
OSM is fine if all you want is a map, but as I said, knowing what something looks like from the ground when you get there... more or less, even with some allowance for the image being a few years old, is still just as useful. Not so much particularly useful by itself, although it could be, as much as an invaluable addition to overhead mapping.
None of the alternatives to Google maps have their own alternative to Street View that is anywhere even close to being as complete, and of the ones that I've tried, they are so incomplete as to be only very modestly more useful than an overhead map in the first place.
One does not have to be a perfect replacement for a service right now to be a serious competitor
Of course, but knowing what a destination looks like from the ground can often be just as important as knowing where it is on a map, and the coverage in that respect using OpenStreetMap is vastly below any usable level. For the couple of alternatives mentioned above, large residential communities within even very major cities in North America are completely uncovered, unless one is interested in an address right on the perimeter of such a community and therefore on a main road. Plus, the only ground-level views that I was ever able to get even of the roads that have coverage were dash-cam views pointed strictly in the direction of travel along that road, so you still can't actually see what a given address looks like when you are right in front of it, and at best only get an oblique view from the side as one approaches it. I would say that neither of them is even a tenth as useful as Street View, and perhaps only very slightly more useful than just having a map alone.
Do they look like they might be on their way to getting there? Sure.... I have to concede that point, but they are still nowhere close to anything that I would think of as a serious competitor, because to me, a serious competitor has to actually *BE* a viable alternative, not just something that might eventually become a useful alternative at some point in the future, assuming that the drive to make it become so even exists, which I wouldn't want to necessarily shut down or impede, but I am dubiously skeptical of.
The only thing keeping bad people from doing that is the difficulty and expense of acquiring certain critical components in sufficient quantity, not the complexity of the task itself. The knowledge is really not that secret.
While it's pretty difficult to control the files people e-mail or torrent each other, it's a hell of a lot easier for the government to clamp down on the ownership of 3D printers.
No more so than it is possible to clamp down on the ownership of regular inkjet printers, computer monitors, or in fact any arbitrary consumer electronic device that happens connects to a computer.
There's nothing special or distinctive about 3d printers as opposed to any other kind of electronics that makes it easier for an outside entity to try and control.
No, satellite view is not a replacement for Street View. Since I was saying Street View is the most distinctive feature of Google Maps that sets it apart from any alternatives that are alleged to be competitors. I was suggesting that if one is already using Street View, then there is no reason why they wouldn't just get the map data from Google as well since it's right there anyways.
I know that Street View itself isn't perfect, but it has close to 100% coverage of practically every street in thousands of cities, including the numerous side streets that go into residential communities within those cities.
You start by saying "street view is amazing, but...", suggesting that you were going to raise some point which might cause one to question how important a feature like street view might be.
But then you don't actually point out anything that would diminish the usefulness of such a facility, so I'm not sure what point you were trying to make.
I said that Google Maps has no real competitors right now because any of the ones that might otherwise be don't have any sort of comprehensive terrestrial virtual presence. If or when they do, that's great.... but they don't right now, and since I'm not a time traveller, I only try and work with technology that has already been invented and make use of it instead of holding out for something that might not even materialize in my lifetime.
Slashdot Mirror
Because as I understand the term, while certainly mischievous, I don't understand how it would necessarily increase the likelihood of one particular election result that I would ordinarily assume to be the case with actual election interference.
(Conspiracy theories.... gotta love 'em)
Getting paid isn't a "perk"... it's a legal requirement.
When I was going to college, I used mine all the time. I haven't really used it since, however.
Fricken awesome calculator though.... I had a variant firmware on mine that made it easy to write your own programs and build them with tigcc.
Depends on the screwdriver. I've seen at least one that uses a pin to lock the bit in so that it can't fall out during use.
There are ways around that is what I'm saying... at least two that come to mind, and for at least one of them, short of not allowing independent developers to write apps for the iPhone at all, there is nothing that Apple can do to stop it.
Perhaps it has evaded your notice that is entirely possible to distribute apps without using those app stores... and while it's true that this would exclude a majority of people, as more and more less technically inclined people find out about a useful application's existence, its popularity will rise even without an official distribution channel. Maybe it won't reach ever a majority, but it sure as heck could be a statistically significant percentage of the population.
Systemically, there's absolutely no way that they can block this. The only hurdle for the technical person is to lower the technical threshold requirements to the point that anyone can do it, or at least anyone with access to the right kind of computer.
It is that very barrier that I am saying that people with the right skills and expertise have a way of lowering.... for everybody. Historically, this has always been the case in computing. Experts figure out how to do something they find useful.... they make it easier and easier to do and eventually the threshold of difficulty is low enough that practically anyone can do it.
My point is that people with a technical background often have the ability to make something accessible to people who lack that background.
True... in fact, if I ever met somebody who tried to present this rationale, I would ask why they are wearing clothes right now.
Everybody has things to hide.... not because they have necessarily done anything wrong, but because some things are simply private.
And that's not even considering the inescapable fact that even *IF* you give the government the benefit of the doubt that they have only the purest and most noble intentions for accessing your private data, if they can access it, then so can the bad guys.... you know, the people that law enforcement is supposed to protect you from?
This makes law enforcement's job *harder*, not easier... since they would now they need to do that much more policing to protect absolutely everybody from people that might to misappropriate your data just because the government has access to it.
Thanks to the distibutive capabilities of the internet, there are.... specifically, if only a couple of experts figure out ways around and happen to publish, then everybody has access to that method...
So they can go right on ahead and arrest people who came up with what amounts to a math proof.
Often a LEGO Discovery Centre will have "adult night" venues from time to time. Visit your nearest one and ask them when the next one will be... you probably won't have to wait more than a month or two.
And the pressure of being forced to produce your password or be put in jail for not producing it only makes it worse so that you can't accurately remember it? While certain types of meds might alleviate some of that if everything goes according to planned expectations, it could just as easily make things even worse.
Memory is a tricky thing sometimes.
Would you rather take more usable daylight in the evening over the health benefits of having at least some sunshine exposure at the start of each day?
I would suggest that is only because being wrong half of the time is still better than being wrong all of the time. If it is wrong all of the time, and 1PM is defined as the permanent midday, then there's no point in considering noon to be a post meridiem time at all.
Human beings have long since evolved, however inconvenient it might be to modern business or to evening recreation, to function best during daylight hours, it makes sense that our time keeping practices should reflect that.
Except those living north of about 45 degrees, sure...
You see, in the summer time, the sun already sets quite late anyways, and DST is not really required to give an extra hour of daylight. While in the winter the does indeed set a lot earlier and an extra hour of daylight at the end of the day could be nice, the sun also rises that much later as well, and any hours you add to the evening take away from the hours of daylight you get in the morning.
And do not fail to consider the well documented health advantages that exist with starting your work day in the sunshine, even if you spend the bulk of it indoors. Pushing the clocks ahead an hour and leaving them there year around would mean that the states bordering Canada would not see a sunrise until 9AM or possibly even later in the middle of wintertime, and you would almost certainly see a sharp uptick in seasonal depression disorder, not to mention creating additional hazards for school-aged children who walk to school having to do so in the dark. The impact in Canada, which would likely imitate the timekeeping practices of the USA, as well in Alaska would be even worse.
Noon (12PM) should be in the middle of the day, not an hour before it. Otherwise calling PM at all is a complete misnomer.
How about the possibility of just wanting to put your best foot forward and not ignore the possibility that getting even that half hour jump start on the work day while you are waiting for your commute to be over, when you are otherwise entirely unproductive anyways, can help to make the rest of the day a little bit stressful?
Sure.... *MAYBE* it will, but I said that there *ARE* no real alternatives to Google Maps, primarily on account of Google Map's ground-level views that are linked directly to the overhead map. That's a present tense assertion. The fact that there are some projects that are making headway which *MIGHT* eventually get there at some point in the future is entirely independent of that.
That said, I'm not holding my breath.... Exhaustive ground level views sides of virtually every road in every major city around the world, including photos of what was off to the sides, took Google years to accumulate, and that was *WITH* corporate backing to make it materialize. And as I said about Mapillary and OpenStreetCam, neither of these even has any views from the ground that are anything other than the direction the vehicle is travelling, which does not really help you know what a particular locations looks like when you actually get there... a core facility of Street View that without it, would make it virtually useless.
I'll concede that Street View isn't nearly as helpful as I usually find it if there are somewhat recent developments in the area and the photos are too old, but in my experience that is relatively infrequently. It happens sometimes, sure... but not so often as to actually impact the overall usefulness of the facility or incline me to not even bother with it, as I can say right now is definitely the case for both of the alternatives mentioned above.
I think that person that needs unicode in their identifiers to obfuscate their code lacks imagination
No, there was definitely some subtle complexity to it.
None of the alternatives to Google maps have their own alternative to Street View that is anywhere even close to being as complete, and of the ones that I've tried, they are so incomplete as to be only very modestly more useful than an overhead map in the first place.
Of course, but knowing what a destination looks like from the ground can often be just as important as knowing where it is on a map, and the coverage in that respect using OpenStreetMap is vastly below any usable level. For the couple of alternatives mentioned above, large residential communities within even very major cities in North America are completely uncovered, unless one is interested in an address right on the perimeter of such a community and therefore on a main road. Plus, the only ground-level views that I was ever able to get even of the roads that have coverage were dash-cam views pointed strictly in the direction of travel along that road, so you still can't actually see what a given address looks like when you are right in front of it, and at best only get an oblique view from the side as one approaches it. I would say that neither of them is even a tenth as useful as Street View, and perhaps only very slightly more useful than just having a map alone.
Do they look like they might be on their way to getting there? Sure.... I have to concede that point, but they are still nowhere close to anything that I would think of as a serious competitor, because to me, a serious competitor has to actually *BE* a viable alternative, not just something that might eventually become a useful alternative at some point in the future, assuming that the drive to make it become so even exists, which I wouldn't want to necessarily shut down or impede, but I am dubiously skeptical of.
The only thing keeping bad people from doing that is the difficulty and expense of acquiring certain critical components in sufficient quantity, not the complexity of the task itself. The knowledge is really not that secret.
No more so than it is possible to clamp down on the ownership of regular inkjet printers, computer monitors, or in fact any arbitrary consumer electronic device that happens connects to a computer.
There's nothing special or distinctive about 3d printers as opposed to any other kind of electronics that makes it easier for an outside entity to try and control.
No, satellite view is not a replacement for Street View. Since I was saying Street View is the most distinctive feature of Google Maps that sets it apart from any alternatives that are alleged to be competitors. I was suggesting that if one is already using Street View, then there is no reason why they wouldn't just get the map data from Google as well since it's right there anyways.
I know that Street View itself isn't perfect, but it has close to 100% coverage of practically every street in thousands of cities, including the numerous side streets that go into residential communities within those cities.
But then you don't actually point out anything that would diminish the usefulness of such a facility, so I'm not sure what point you were trying to make.
I said that Google Maps has no real competitors right now because any of the ones that might otherwise be don't have any sort of comprehensive terrestrial virtual presence. If or when they do, that's great.... but they don't right now, and since I'm not a time traveller, I only try and work with technology that has already been invented and make use of it instead of holding out for something that might not even materialize in my lifetime.