The solution is to make delivery of caller ID data that is not true and correct just ILLEGAL. A $1,000 fine per incident.
The telcos would have to turn off the caller ID until they could secure that whole system. Unfortunately they are the only ones who could do it. And as soon as possible please.
Except I think they can't. I think caller ID support is one of those features that Telco's are required by law to provide for all lines. Which makes sense to me why they wouldn't be too motivated to maintain the system; it's not a marketable service, they lose money by providing it.
Libertarianism is extremely useful as a fringe party. They serve as a reminder to the Republicans that there are actually real people who actually favor small government, and as a reminder to Democrats that there really are genuine conservatives out there. As a serious contender for President? No way. No Libertarian would be able to swing enough "main stream" vote.
It makes perfect sense as explained, it just doesn't happen to jive with the reality of human behavior
I have to agree 100%. Its an interesting and attractive ideal (to some), but not realistic in the real world. It serves a purpose though.
Don't like it? Don't use the (Android) software, then.
Is it even inherent to Android? I just assumed this was part of the "Google Experience" that we agreed to when we installed Gmail, Gvoice, Gcalendar, and Glegalguardian apps.
This might draw ire from the software anarchists on this site, but I am actually very happy Google did this. They usually let anyone into the Marketplace that wants to hang out, I'm glad they are sweeping out the garbage.
It is in the ToS. Most of us probably didn't read it in detail (I know I didn't) but we agreed to it when we purchased the phone and downloaded the app from the Marketplace. If a user got their hands on an install file and installed this thing manually I don't think anyone at Google would bat an eye. This is just Google exercising stewardship over their distribution mechanism. They tend to be very hands off in this respect, but we can't expect them to allow total anarchy. No-one can really expect total control over all aspects of a device that operates on someone else's network, or even privacy on a mobile phone in general.
I think you are right. It is easy to paint Google and Apple as opposite ends of a Privacy/User Control spectrum, but in reality I think they are very close.
Total Slippery Slope - what else can they nuke when the Mafiaa decide "you have a copy of Oh Mickey In Spanish that violates copyright law so we'll nuke it for you."
This article has nothing to do with copyright. Not every article on this site needs to inevitably lead to discussion of copyright.
This sounds like an Apple move
That is a good point. It is a step towards the "walled garden" Apple experience, or shows at least a little but of interest, on Google's part, in maintaining the quality of their platform. This app served no useful purpose, and might have set a dangerous precedent for other apps to surreptitiously collect and report user data. The GP's suggestion of emailing affected users, while respectful of the user's free will, would do little to prevent future data miners from attempting to distribute similar apps. In fact, it would send the message that if they distribute enough such applications they will end up with a small percentage of mindless users that fail to remove the app from their phone.
This remote nuking (as is oft joked) is the only way to be sure.
. Sorry bud, but as an adult and a US citizen, I do not be believe it is the government's business what substances I choose to ingest into my body.
Its not. It is the Government's business to step in to regulate the production and distribution of dangerous chemical substances. How much do you know about the process of cooking meth? Besides the immediate health risk to the person doing the cooking, the byproduct gas poses a huge danger to any other occupants in the building by inhalation, and is extremely volatile (read: big fireball asplosion).
Furthermore, individuals under the influence of meth commonly become paranoid and violent, and tend to be extremely difficult to subdue. They present a direct physical threat to people around them. The Government has not only the right, but the responsibility to protect us lawful citizens from people like that.
If you want to put that crap into your body then feel free, I don't think many people would try to stop you. But you do not get to cook and use that crap in my neighborhood, where you risk burning down my house with your jerry-rigged POS still, and threaten my kids with your dangerous and destructive behavior. If you don't see the difference in social costs between meth and marijuana, than you deserve an overbearing Government telling you what to do. You probably need the guidance.
I don't believe that is entirely true. It is not illegal in the US, however it may void a service or purchase contract for the device. Carriers then have the right to refuse continued service for the device (though that rarely goes beyond warrantied replacement and repairs). Even though our ridiculously expensive monthly plans serve to subsidize the cost of the phone, individuals are generally still considered to have purchases the phone. US customers rarely lease or rent phones from carriers outside of business plans.
We are free to do anything we like with the device, but if we violate the terms of our service plan ToA's then the carriers are free to kick us right off of their network.
Not a lawyer, but financial reward is not required for speech to be considered slander (or written work to be considered libel).
I don't think the slander/libel argument is appropriate in this instance, e360 would (I believe) need to be able to prove that Spamhaus demonstrated a reckless disregard for the truth, and made statements that injured e360. Defining "spam", proving that what e360 sent was actually spam, and proving that e360 was injured by their inability to deliver those messages all sound like incredibly difficult.
Frankly if the players say it is interfering with their ability to play the game it is interfering with the game, and neither you or I are have any standing to argue with them.
Puhleeeeease. They're a bunch of spoilt primadonnas, the lot of them.
Though at some level I agree with your sentiment, I also have to consider how I would feel if a couple tens of thousands of people showed up at my place of employment and droned on with those things while I worked. I imagine it would make it quite difficult to communicate effectively with my coworkers too.
MS is just spreading the word about their new tech much earlier in the development cycle. Apple knows that it already has its fanbois standing in line to get whatever it is they come out with next, they don't have to worry about generating interest 2-3 years ahead of time.
MS likes the image of itself as an R&D innovator (whether or not they actually are, thats the image they like to portray). It is in their best interests for everyone to see their projects as the develop. Think of all the press time and attention they've gotten over Natal (now Kinect). That is free publicity, just for being open during their development process.
I did that through undergrad. The only time that would come back on me would be when professors would assign problem sets directly from the texts. Then the only thing I could do was to 1) Find a pirated copy of the current version or 2) Make friends with someone who had the current version.
Because you're spewing out exactly what Glen Beck told you to spew out.
Don't even watch the show. I don't even watch the channel. If believing that I do makes it easier to disregard an informed opinion that happens not to concur with yours, then knock yourself out. I'm still waiting for a reasonable counterargument to anything I said.
I realize that you've probably grown up being told that all opinions are equal...but they were lying to you.
Don't put words into my mouth. That is unrelated, and simply untrue. I should think that the parts of my post ridiculing you for failing to justify your opinion would serve as evidence that I do not subscribe to that idea. At least take the time to understand what is written before you have a hissy fit.
...and everyone should get the chance to have their voice heard...
Actually, yes. I do agree with that bit. Last I checked, this is the United States of America. Where I, as a citizen, am entitled to representation in Government. One of my major problems with the healthcare debate (as an example) was the intentional obscurity the bill was written in (remember the Pelosi statement: We have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it.?). It seems very fitting that you, being dismissive of arguments that you refuse to even consider, support the political actions of people that push through unpopular legislation because it will be in our best interests whether we support it or not.
I should slow down, I've just realized that I made the assumption that you lean to the left politically. Correct me if that is incorrect. But if that is true, I would encourage you to think about the term "Liberal". Which loosely means to be open minded, and not limited to established or traditional idealogies. Again, I would extend the offer to be receptive to any arguments you might have to show me my errors. Until you do, I have to just assume that it is you that is spewing the left-wing hate speech that you have been spoon fed, presumably because that is the popular bandwagon these days for wanna-be intellectuals. Enjoy your delusional sense of smug superiority. I hope life is happy in Douchesville.
I think they would want to sell to North Americans. We have a huge amount of disposable income, buy into the whole green thing, and feel bad about how bad things are in Africa. By selling huge volumes to us, they can develop processes to manufacture these cheaply, and make them more affordable to 3rd worlders.
There's no reason that a third world solar powered bulb would be shaped like a North American bulb, complete with screw threads moulded into the plastic on the top. It's meant to be cute.
Why reinvent the wheel? I am assuming that the bulb included in this thing is also manufactured and sold separately. Designing a manufacturing process just to produce this one component of a clearly niche product seems more wasteful than just grabbing components off the shelf.
That said, this bulb will run for two hours? I don't care how long it takes to charge, if it can't run for more than two hours then what's the point? A lightbulb that only functions a little bit after dark isn't going to help anyone do anything in the dark.
In a third world country that lacks reliable energy (as you mentioned) an additional 2 hours of light per day does seem useful. Assume an overly simple example: If your average day cycle has 12 hours of light and 12 hours of dark, and the people are sleeping for only 8 of those dark hours, then this bulb just added 2 hours of productivity that would have otherwise been wasted. That's 2 hours of extra work, or 2 extra hours to study. Likely, this would be shared between a family. That's 2 extra productive hours per person. To me, that seems worthwhile.
The needle didn't move. After a few minutes, he began doubting the machine, and then questioned me on if I was operating it right.
If the needle wasn't moving at all then the tester was probably right to question if you were cooperating. Polygraphs measure respiration, blood pressure, and electrodermal activity (the needles serve to sketch waves of those features on a roll of moving paper). All of these would be showing some movement on a normal person, unless of course you were a Zombie at the time.
Polygraphers make their judgements by comparing the data collected from baseline questions (e.g. Is today Tuesday?) vs. irrelevant questions (e.g. Did you ever as a child steal money from your mom's purse) vs. relevant questions (e.g. Did you murder Bob?). They expect to see changes in physiology on each of these types of questions.
To most LE professionals, and others interested in credibility assessment, the biggest strength of the polygraph is as a professional tool. For example convincing that the person that: He man, we are just trying to get to the truth and that this is the last chance to come clean about everything before we go got the results of the polygraph. Once we get the results there is nothing we can do to help you, but if you come clean now we can tell the judge you were cooperative.
There's a reason that polygraph tests are 1.5-3 hours long. They are really really stressful and fatigue interviewees. That fatigue makes it a lot easier to get the person to provide more information. It might not be good information, but it is more information.
Slashdot Mirror
The solution is to make delivery of caller ID data that is not true and correct just ILLEGAL. A $1,000 fine per incident. The telcos would have to turn off the caller ID until they could secure that whole system. Unfortunately they are the only ones who could do it. And as soon as possible please.
Except I think they can't. I think caller ID support is one of those features that Telco's are required by law to provide for all lines. Which makes sense to me why they wouldn't be too motivated to maintain the system; it's not a marketable service, they lose money by providing it.
Libertarianism is extremely useful as a fringe party. They serve as a reminder to the Republicans that there are actually real people who actually favor small government, and as a reminder to Democrats that there really are genuine conservatives out there. As a serious contender for President? No way. No Libertarian would be able to swing enough "main stream" vote.
It makes perfect sense as explained, it just doesn't happen to jive with the reality of human behavior
I have to agree 100%. Its an interesting and attractive ideal (to some), but not realistic in the real world. It serves a purpose though.
Oh-ho! That was tricky what you did there!
I'm probably going to burn some mod points with this, but I just want to go on record saying that I think you are a huge piece of shit.
Don't like it? Don't use the (Android) software, then.
Is it even inherent to Android? I just assumed this was part of the "Google Experience" that we agreed to when we installed Gmail, Gvoice, Gcalendar, and Glegalguardian apps.
This might draw ire from the software anarchists on this site, but I am actually very happy Google did this. They usually let anyone into the Marketplace that wants to hang out, I'm glad they are sweeping out the garbage.
It is in the ToS. Most of us probably didn't read it in detail (I know I didn't) but we agreed to it when we purchased the phone and downloaded the app from the Marketplace. If a user got their hands on an install file and installed this thing manually I don't think anyone at Google would bat an eye. This is just Google exercising stewardship over their distribution mechanism. They tend to be very hands off in this respect, but we can't expect them to allow total anarchy. No-one can really expect total control over all aspects of a device that operates on someone else's network, or even privacy on a mobile phone in general.
I think you are right. It is easy to paint Google and Apple as opposite ends of a Privacy/User Control spectrum, but in reality I think they are very close.
Total Slippery Slope - what else can they nuke when the Mafiaa decide "you have a copy of Oh Mickey In Spanish that violates copyright law so we'll nuke it for you."
This article has nothing to do with copyright. Not every article on this site needs to inevitably lead to discussion of copyright.
This sounds like an Apple move
That is a good point. It is a step towards the "walled garden" Apple experience, or shows at least a little but of interest, on Google's part, in maintaining the quality of their platform. This app served no useful purpose, and might have set a dangerous precedent for other apps to surreptitiously collect and report user data. The GP's suggestion of emailing affected users, while respectful of the user's free will, would do little to prevent future data miners from attempting to distribute similar apps. In fact, it would send the message that if they distribute enough such applications they will end up with a small percentage of mindless users that fail to remove the app from their phone.
This remote nuking (as is oft joked) is the only way to be sure.
That's funny. How high up are you?
I'm in a basement just over the river in Cambridge and we didn't notice a thing.
. Sorry bud, but as an adult and a US citizen, I do not be believe it is the government's business what substances I choose to ingest into my body.
Its not. It is the Government's business to step in to regulate the production and distribution of dangerous chemical substances. How much do you know about the process of cooking meth? Besides the immediate health risk to the person doing the cooking, the byproduct gas poses a huge danger to any other occupants in the building by inhalation, and is extremely volatile (read: big fireball asplosion).
Furthermore, individuals under the influence of meth commonly become paranoid and violent, and tend to be extremely difficult to subdue. They present a direct physical threat to people around them. The Government has not only the right, but the responsibility to protect us lawful citizens from people like that.
If you want to put that crap into your body then feel free, I don't think many people would try to stop you. But you do not get to cook and use that crap in my neighborhood, where you risk burning down my house with your jerry-rigged POS still, and threaten my kids with your dangerous and destructive behavior. If you don't see the difference in social costs between meth and marijuana, than you deserve an overbearing Government telling you what to do. You probably need the guidance.
I don't believe that is entirely true. It is not illegal in the US, however it may void a service or purchase contract for the device. Carriers then have the right to refuse continued service for the device (though that rarely goes beyond warrantied replacement and repairs). Even though our ridiculously expensive monthly plans serve to subsidize the cost of the phone, individuals are generally still considered to have purchases the phone. US customers rarely lease or rent phones from carriers outside of business plans.
We are free to do anything we like with the device, but if we violate the terms of our service plan ToA's then the carriers are free to kick us right off of their network.
I concur. I had no idea this existed, I am extremely excited to get home this evening and check this out.
Though I suspect my girlfriend may not be as happy about this as I am.
Not a lawyer, but financial reward is not required for speech to be considered slander (or written work to be considered libel).
I don't think the slander/libel argument is appropriate in this instance, e360 would (I believe) need to be able to prove that Spamhaus demonstrated a reckless disregard for the truth, and made statements that injured e360. Defining "spam", proving that what e360 sent was actually spam, and proving that e360 was injured by their inability to deliver those messages all sound like incredibly difficult.
Its libelous.
His point is that even if nobody listens that does not give him the freedom to make slanderous statements, even if people have to opt-in to listen..
My Grandparents are German you insensitive clod!
Frankly if the players say it is interfering with their ability to play the game it is interfering with the game, and neither you or I are have any standing to argue with them.
Puhleeeeease. They're a bunch of spoilt primadonnas, the lot of them.
Though at some level I agree with your sentiment, I also have to consider how I would feel if a couple tens of thousands of people showed up at my place of employment and droned on with those things while I worked. I imagine it would make it quite difficult to communicate effectively with my coworkers too.
making you a small minority.
Actually, I think that makes use a plump, supersized minority. But I get your point.
Having read this, I regret that I already posted elsewhere and cannot mod you up. That is a very Insightful point (see what I did there?).
MS is just spreading the word about their new tech much earlier in the development cycle. Apple knows that it already has its fanbois standing in line to get whatever it is they come out with next, they don't have to worry about generating interest 2-3 years ahead of time.
MS likes the image of itself as an R&D innovator (whether or not they actually are, thats the image they like to portray). It is in their best interests for everyone to see their projects as the develop. Think of all the press time and attention they've gotten over Natal (now Kinect). That is free publicity, just for being open during their development process.
I did that through undergrad. The only time that would come back on me would be when professors would assign problem sets directly from the texts. Then the only thing I could do was to 1) Find a pirated copy of the current version or 2) Make friends with someone who had the current version.
Because you're spewing out exactly what Glen Beck told you to spew out.
Don't even watch the show. I don't even watch the channel. If believing that I do makes it easier to disregard an informed opinion that happens not to concur with yours, then knock yourself out. I'm still waiting for a reasonable counterargument to anything I said.
I realize that you've probably grown up being told that all opinions are equal...but they were lying to you.
Don't put words into my mouth. That is unrelated, and simply untrue. I should think that the parts of my post ridiculing you for failing to justify your opinion would serve as evidence that I do not subscribe to that idea. At least take the time to understand what is written before you have a hissy fit.
...and everyone should get the chance to have their voice heard...
Actually, yes. I do agree with that bit. Last I checked, this is the United States of America. Where I, as a citizen, am entitled to representation in Government. One of my major problems with the healthcare debate (as an example) was the intentional obscurity the bill was written in (remember the Pelosi statement: We have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it.?). It seems very fitting that you, being dismissive of arguments that you refuse to even consider, support the political actions of people that push through unpopular legislation because it will be in our best interests whether we support it or not.
I should slow down, I've just realized that I made the assumption that you lean to the left politically. Correct me if that is incorrect. But if that is true, I would encourage you to think about the term "Liberal". Which loosely means to be open minded, and not limited to established or traditional idealogies. Again, I would extend the offer to be receptive to any arguments you might have to show me my errors. Until you do, I have to just assume that it is you that is spewing the left-wing hate speech that you have been spoon fed, presumably because that is the popular bandwagon these days for wanna-be intellectuals. Enjoy your delusional sense of smug superiority. I hope life is happy in Douchesville.
I think they would want to sell to North Americans. We have a huge amount of disposable income, buy into the whole green thing, and feel bad about how bad things are in Africa. By selling huge volumes to us, they can develop processes to manufacture these cheaply, and make them more affordable to 3rd worlders.
There's no reason that a third world solar powered bulb would be shaped like a North American bulb, complete with screw threads moulded into the plastic on the top. It's meant to be cute.
Why reinvent the wheel? I am assuming that the bulb included in this thing is also manufactured and sold separately. Designing a manufacturing process just to produce this one component of a clearly niche product seems more wasteful than just grabbing components off the shelf.
That said, this bulb will run for two hours? I don't care how long it takes to charge, if it can't run for more than two hours then what's the point? A lightbulb that only functions a little bit after dark isn't going to help anyone do anything in the dark.
In a third world country that lacks reliable energy (as you mentioned) an additional 2 hours of light per day does seem useful. Assume an overly simple example: If your average day cycle has 12 hours of light and 12 hours of dark, and the people are sleeping for only 8 of those dark hours, then this bulb just added 2 hours of productivity that would have otherwise been wasted. That's 2 hours of extra work, or 2 extra hours to study. Likely, this would be shared between a family. That's 2 extra productive hours per person. To me, that seems worthwhile.
And the money I pay into home insurance has very little relation to how much I get back if my house catches fire. What's your point?
You have the choice to not purchase insurance. You do not get to opt out of paying into Social Security.
The needle didn't move. After a few minutes, he began doubting the machine, and then questioned me on if I was operating it right.
If the needle wasn't moving at all then the tester was probably right to question if you were cooperating. Polygraphs measure respiration, blood pressure, and electrodermal activity (the needles serve to sketch waves of those features on a roll of moving paper). All of these would be showing some movement on a normal person, unless of course you were a Zombie at the time.
Polygraphers make their judgements by comparing the data collected from baseline questions (e.g. Is today Tuesday?) vs. irrelevant questions (e.g. Did you ever as a child steal money from your mom's purse) vs. relevant questions (e.g. Did you murder Bob?). They expect to see changes in physiology on each of these types of questions.
To most LE professionals, and others interested in credibility assessment, the biggest strength of the polygraph is as a professional tool. For example convincing that the person that: He man, we are just trying to get to the truth and that this is the last chance to come clean about everything before we go got the results of the polygraph. Once we get the results there is nothing we can do to help you, but if you come clean now we can tell the judge you were cooperative.
There's a reason that polygraph tests are 1.5-3 hours long. They are really really stressful and fatigue interviewees. That fatigue makes it a lot easier to get the person to provide more information. It might not be good information, but it is more information.
If something catches fire on that vehicle(and thus catches the shrubbery), you have a burning bush. No word on if anyone would be speaking from it.
Unintelligible screams of terror seems likely.