The additional marketing expense of buying a product is generally inconsequential to other marketing costs, thus the verified purchase tags essentially mean nothing.
Yeah, it really annoys me that sites promote anything an expert says as being just as valid on topics for which the expert is, definitively, not an expert. Anyone even remotely familiar with economics that has made even a precursory glance at distant predictions of mankind's fate is familiar with Thomas Malthus.
Let's be a little more precise: Every computer/device for sale in the United States.
The more obvious result is that it does next to nothing to curb the issues related to security while greatly increasing the barrier to entry, plus costing the taxpayers a whole bunch of money.
Maybe it's just the circles I've ran in, but usually when someone says "VTA", they are referring to the light rail, and when referring to VTA buses, they say "the bus".
This is exactly the problem. Prices are a fairly straightforward function of supply and demand. Even look beyond the homeless in the city to other towns, such as San Jose around Tully/101/280. Go driving around those neighborhoods in the evenings and you see cars parked absolutely everywhere: lawns, sideyards, crammed and jammed up into garages and driveways and sidewalks, and of course good luck ever finding a spot on the street. Because San Jose, like San Francisco and the rest of the SF Bay Area, doesn't want to allow enough new residential units to be built each year, the supply of housing ends going only towards the wealthy or those who have a home and can afford to re-fi and use the cash as a downpayment. The rest, including the "working class,", have got nowhere to go because developers all but stopped investment in building anything they can even afford to rent, unless with a large group of strangers.
The better solution is don't "take" the money, just let developers choose how many units they want to invest in and they will remedy the problem, profitably, without stealing anyone's money.
I am really hoping the measure fails because the SF Bay Area has a pathetic history of wasting money on similar efforts (VTA doesn't go to SJC or connect to BART, there is a train that goes from Novato to Petaluma WTF) and the officials need to not have such a convenient cop-out every time this issue gets brought up. What is happening right now is a caste is forming with the landowners becoming a smaller percentage, huge swaths of the population being crammed into miserable housing that eats up all of their income, and I'm not sure this has a happy ending.
By your reasoning, we should abolish all manufacturer-owned retail outlets, because there is no benefit to Sears selling Craftsman, Tesla-owned dealerships, or Dell making their own computers, etc. Somehow, when someone makes a movie and wants to display it in a dedicated venue onto a projected screen in a dark stadium, we just can't tolerate it.
BTW, how come if independent theaters were made strong, then why is Hastings complaining about an oligopoly?
The government proposes to add a backdoor to all encryption systems, and Schneier, an encryption expert, immediately goes to bat, contributing to and promoting large amounts of nuanced study on the matter to explain why such a proposal will fail. Then, on this networking issue, Schneier provides a completely unbacked claim that the Government is somehow going to magically fix something. I guess because Schneier is a "good guy" I should just assume that his completely unsubstantiated, critical-thinking-free solution is the one that we should support.
There is nothing the U.S. Government can do about hacked IoT devices in other countries. How about that one, Schneier? Are you even going to admit to the fundamental core of the World Wide Web is a substantial part of the problem, and cannot be addressed by U.S. government legislation?
Schneier's claim is barely three weeks from the date of the event, and Schneier is boldly proclaiming the market has failed. Puh-lease. There are very few, if any, events of this magnitude that any "solution", private or public, can take care of, or even propose to take care of, in such a short time.
Brian Krebs has clearly been the victim of some malicious actor, and as such must have methods for being made whole. These options do not even seem to merit any evaluation by Schneier.
The studios are not allowed to own their own theaters, per the 1948 ruling in United States v. Paramount Pictures, Inc.. The ruling is the same as making the claim that Matco can't make it's own tools and sell them from their own trucks or Apple can't sell iPhones from its own stores. Totally lame and arbitrary and definitely contributes to reduced investment, thus reduced innovation.
I was driving on my twisty, deer-riddled, surprisingly high-traffic back county road when the loudest, most annoying noise I've ever heard from inside my car scared the crap out of me. I had absolutely no idea what sound could be coming from because I had disabled notifications on my phones before driving. It actually took me a few minutes to figure out that my iPhone was giving me an Amber alert for somewhere far enough away to not be relevant to me, and definitely far more distracting than glancing at a text message. As soon as I could, I pulled over and disabled all emergency alerts. Those things are dangerous!
The issue of public counting is the same as "publicly available" information, which is that the information is only available to those who go to witness the counting, which means that the real world effectiveness of the audit method approaches zero. Auditing should be as conveniently available as possible to everyone who casts a vote, and an anonymous verification of each vote cast, plus being able to count all votes cast, would provide an incremental improvement in protecting against election fraud.
(It is also worth nothing that public viewing of the vote count is not possible by all voters, because the audit venue cannot support all voters being present, so in the case that there is concern over vote integrity, perps may intentionally fill the venue and prevent others from viewing the audit.)
That is all speculative conjecture. You are not providing evidence. Your claim does not align with what what I have experienced. My suggestion in no way requires the tabulation state who has voted how, only a method to allow audit by each voter.
I didn't read the article this way. He is just pointing out popular, direct evidence of hacking political activities to build support for increasing security of the election infrastructure.
There is no perfect system (nirvana fallacy) and your discussion does not compare the advantages and disadvantages of each system, and instead arrives at a conclusion based on listing disadvantages.
Voters can already be intimidated and provide proof of their vote with MMS, or any of the myriad photo-sharing apps, many of which are now providing end-to-end encryption.
The elimination of the voter being able to prove how they voted through official documentation removes the voter's ability to perform an audit of their own vote's tabulation. Voters uncovering elections fraud outweighs the very small (non-existent? - provide a link to cases of these claims, ever? Appeal to probability much?) vote-buying instances.
I'm in the same boat with my Dell, but it is 9 years old. I use it for business trips because all I ever have time for is responding to email, maybe open some spreadsheets. Everything else I need I can get from my phone. I like the old Dell because it has a ridiculous battery life since it is just a Core Duo 1.2 GHz with a battery nearly half the laptop's weight.
This is completely correct, but the solution is not forking, as many will suggest. Recognizing that there are different views on everything should be accomplished not by just having different paragraphs in the same article, but entirely different articles with different maintainers under the same title, with presentation clearly calling out the different maintainers. Further, you could make the articles clearly part of someone or some group's approval.
This way people who want to understand the differing viewpoints on various topics can see how they are presented by the people who believe in that viewpoint. While this may muddy the water, I believe this would be superior to the current debacle because it would eliminate the bureaucrats and their fiefdoms from polluting the overall resource with their petty games, which is, by far, the very worst and most discouraging part of Wikipedia for both editors and readers.
Slashdot Mirror
Dollars to doughnuts that gets flipped after updates every 6 months or so.
The additional marketing expense of buying a product is generally inconsequential to other marketing costs, thus the verified purchase tags essentially mean nothing.
Yeah, it really annoys me that sites promote anything an expert says as being just as valid on topics for which the expert is, definitively, not an expert. Anyone even remotely familiar with economics that has made even a precursory glance at distant predictions of mankind's fate is familiar with Thomas Malthus.
So find one and ask away.
Because the Internet is a "road" that connects to everywhere in the world, plus satellites. Kind of changes the effectiveness of local legislation.
The "follow the RFC" mantra sounds nice here in a forum, but the admins at ground zero of these issues will tell you a different story.
Let's be a little more precise: Every computer/device for sale in the United States.
The more obvious result is that it does next to nothing to curb the issues related to security while greatly increasing the barrier to entry, plus costing the taxpayers a whole bunch of money.
Because the Government had nothing to do with that - all just the wacky evilness of pure private enterprise run amok.
Maybe it's just the circles I've ran in, but usually when someone says "VTA", they are referring to the light rail, and when referring to VTA buses, they say "the bus".
Robin Hood returned taxes to the taxed.
This is exactly the problem. Prices are a fairly straightforward function of supply and demand. Even look beyond the homeless in the city to other towns, such as San Jose around Tully/101/280. Go driving around those neighborhoods in the evenings and you see cars parked absolutely everywhere: lawns, sideyards, crammed and jammed up into garages and driveways and sidewalks, and of course good luck ever finding a spot on the street. Because San Jose, like San Francisco and the rest of the SF Bay Area, doesn't want to allow enough new residential units to be built each year, the supply of housing ends going only towards the wealthy or those who have a home and can afford to re-fi and use the cash as a downpayment. The rest, including the "working class,", have got nowhere to go because developers all but stopped investment in building anything they can even afford to rent, unless with a large group of strangers.
The better solution is don't "take" the money, just let developers choose how many units they want to invest in and they will remedy the problem, profitably, without stealing anyone's money.
I am really hoping the measure fails because the SF Bay Area has a pathetic history of wasting money on similar efforts (VTA doesn't go to SJC or connect to BART, there is a train that goes from Novato to Petaluma WTF) and the officials need to not have such a convenient cop-out every time this issue gets brought up. What is happening right now is a caste is forming with the landowners becoming a smaller percentage, huge swaths of the population being crammed into miserable housing that eats up all of their income, and I'm not sure this has a happy ending.
By your reasoning, we should abolish all manufacturer-owned retail outlets, because there is no benefit to Sears selling Craftsman, Tesla-owned dealerships, or Dell making their own computers, etc. Somehow, when someone makes a movie and wants to display it in a dedicated venue onto a projected screen in a dark stadium, we just can't tolerate it.
BTW, how come if independent theaters were made strong, then why is Hastings complaining about an oligopoly?
The government proposes to add a backdoor to all encryption systems, and Schneier, an encryption expert, immediately goes to bat, contributing to and promoting large amounts of nuanced study on the matter to explain why such a proposal will fail. Then, on this networking issue, Schneier provides a completely unbacked claim that the Government is somehow going to magically fix something. I guess because Schneier is a "good guy" I should just assume that his completely unsubstantiated, critical-thinking-free solution is the one that we should support.
There is nothing the U.S. Government can do about hacked IoT devices in other countries. How about that one, Schneier? Are you even going to admit to the fundamental core of the World Wide Web is a substantial part of the problem, and cannot be addressed by U.S. government legislation?
Schneier's claim is barely three weeks from the date of the event, and Schneier is boldly proclaiming the market has failed. Puh-lease. There are very few, if any, events of this magnitude that any "solution", private or public, can take care of, or even propose to take care of, in such a short time.
Brian Krebs has clearly been the victim of some malicious actor, and as such must have methods for being made whole. These options do not even seem to merit any evaluation by Schneier.
The studios are not allowed to own their own theaters, per the 1948 ruling in United States v. Paramount Pictures, Inc.. The ruling is the same as making the claim that Matco can't make it's own tools and sell them from their own trucks or Apple can't sell iPhones from its own stores. Totally lame and arbitrary and definitely contributes to reduced investment, thus reduced innovation.
I was driving on my twisty, deer-riddled, surprisingly high-traffic back county road when the loudest, most annoying noise I've ever heard from inside my car scared the crap out of me. I had absolutely no idea what sound could be coming from because I had disabled notifications on my phones before driving. It actually took me a few minutes to figure out that my iPhone was giving me an Amber alert for somewhere far enough away to not be relevant to me, and definitely far more distracting than glancing at a text message. As soon as I could, I pulled over and disabled all emergency alerts. Those things are dangerous!
The issue of public counting is the same as "publicly available" information, which is that the information is only available to those who go to witness the counting, which means that the real world effectiveness of the audit method approaches zero. Auditing should be as conveniently available as possible to everyone who casts a vote, and an anonymous verification of each vote cast, plus being able to count all votes cast, would provide an incremental improvement in protecting against election fraud.
(It is also worth nothing that public viewing of the vote count is not possible by all voters, because the audit venue cannot support all voters being present, so in the case that there is concern over vote integrity, perps may intentionally fill the venue and prevent others from viewing the audit.)
That is all speculative conjecture. You are not providing evidence. Your claim does not align with what what I have experienced. My suggestion in no way requires the tabulation state who has voted how, only a method to allow audit by each voter.
I didn't read the article this way. He is just pointing out popular, direct evidence of hacking political activities to build support for increasing security of the election infrastructure.
Your conclusion is wrong, due several factors:
There is no perfect system (nirvana fallacy) and your discussion does not compare the advantages and disadvantages of each system, and instead arrives at a conclusion based on listing disadvantages.
Voters can already be intimidated and provide proof of their vote with MMS, or any of the myriad photo-sharing apps, many of which are now providing end-to-end encryption.
The elimination of the voter being able to prove how they voted through official documentation removes the voter's ability to perform an audit of their own vote's tabulation. Voters uncovering elections fraud outweighs the very small (non-existent? - provide a link to cases of these claims, ever? Appeal to probability much?) vote-buying instances.
You can also use the same ink type used in Fisher Space Pens.
Would not having a maintained OS be reason enough for them?
I'm in the same boat with my Dell, but it is 9 years old. I use it for business trips because all I ever have time for is responding to email, maybe open some spreadsheets. Everything else I need I can get from my phone. I like the old Dell because it has a ridiculous battery life since it is just a Core Duo 1.2 GHz with a battery nearly half the laptop's weight.
DuckDuckGo is hosted on AWS, so there is nothing special about using it other than it isn't Google or Microsoft.
I thought Robin hood recovered tax revenues and returned those to the taxpayers?
This is completely correct, but the solution is not forking, as many will suggest. Recognizing that there are different views on everything should be accomplished not by just having different paragraphs in the same article, but entirely different articles with different maintainers under the same title, with presentation clearly calling out the different maintainers. Further, you could make the articles clearly part of someone or some group's approval.
This way people who want to understand the differing viewpoints on various topics can see how they are presented by the people who believe in that viewpoint. While this may muddy the water, I believe this would be superior to the current debacle because it would eliminate the bureaucrats and their fiefdoms from polluting the overall resource with their petty games, which is, by far, the very worst and most discouraging part of Wikipedia for both editors and readers.