There are many things about cars which you are legally obliged to do, or not do, despite you owning the car. It would be difficult to see how is significantly different.
I have never driven drunk. However, I dated a girl who had a boyfriend with an interlock and also have a friend that had an interlock. The technology is incredibly unreliable. And I don't mean unreliable from a BAC standpoint but from actually being able to start your car. And if the interlock device isn't working properly and you try to start your car? You get a huge fine and can potentially be thrown in jail. Not because you actually tried to drive drunk but because the device itself malfunctioned.
Cars are big, hard and move fast. It's not unreasonable that there are limitations put on these devices so that they are safe for everybody else.
Which is why we should make it more difficult to get a drivers license in the first place. I see hundreds of people on my commute every day that should not have a drivers license. I think they are a far larger risk to my personal safety and to society in general than the small number of drunk drivers, who, by the way, probably wouldn't have a drivers license in the first place if we made testing more difficult.
Did IQs suddenly drop while I was away? You could feed a family of four with what these cost. When they stop working you just throw them out?! I have a few decent $8 earbuds from over 5 years ago that still work and sound perfect to this day. In my opinion, they make people look ridiculous, at least Spock and Uhura's earpieces looked better on them than these things. I weep for the future.
How many $8 headphones does my dog have to rip out of my ears for this to be economical? About 20 pairs. Now realistically I used to spend about $10-12 a pair and my dog would accidentally destroy a pair once every 8-10 months. Not that she was trying to destroy them, but she gets excited and prances around me (not even jumping on me) and accidentally snags a dangling wire and now I've lost a pair of headphones and potentially damaged my phone. A good pair of bluetooth headphones will run you $120 easily. But it's a hell of a lot cheaper to throw these away than to have a phone destroyed because your dog ripped it out of your hands by the headphone wire. Thankfully she has never broken a phone.
I will say that prior to getting the dog I probably would go 5+ years per pair of headphones and was more likely to lose them than to ruin them.
Huh. Somebody who thinks the way an acronym's letters are pronounced in their respective words has ANYTHING AT ALL to do with how the acronym should be pronounced... is calling somebody *else* a moron? Funny.
Once again, the ONLY points that have any relevance whatsoever are:
1. The person who invents a technology deserves the right to name it, and only a total asshole would ignore their wishes.
2. The Cabal has authorized me to reveal that, for as long as the GIF format has existed, pronouncing "gif" correctly -- i.e., like "gin", not like "git" -- has been one of the not-so-secret recognition codes by which people who have any clue about computer stuff identify each other.
And he sure exercised his right to name it, didn't he? He named it the "Graphics Interchange Format". Not JIF, not GIF. And I've known he pronounced it like JIF since I was a kid but still refuse to do so. Why would I bother to try and confuse people with a peanut butter brand? SO that I can be an elitist asshole? No, I think I'll pronounce it how it is spelled. You're welcome to think I am ignorant for doing so, I really don't care.
"Dumbasses don't factory reset their Teslas, and leave a lot of personal info in them."
How hard was that?
You do realize that there could be situations where the computer is broken to the point where the owner cannot factory reset them yet they may still be in good enough shape that data can be extracted from the storage media, correct? You should never assume that the end user is able to factory reset. The data should be held encrypted on the device with something like a TPM that protects the encryption keys and requires a recovery key to be used once you remove the device from the car.
Because in the US he could sue them for discrimination AND WIN.
I see. Google tells me that "national origin" is a protected class in US federal employment discrimination law. Also citizenship status.
This seems foolish.
Is there really no exception for bona fide security concerns outside military contractors?
You can be quite sure the Chinese would not allow westerners anywhere near their corporate secrets.
You have no idea how absurd it is. I used to do work for the DoD that required US Citizenship. Was I allowed to ask people in an interview if they were US citizens? Nope. It was illegal. Never mind that the type of work we did required citizenship by law. We would have to find clever ways to determine if they were citizens. This is why most of those DoD jobs require active clearances to already be in the possession of the applicant.
To be clear, I don't really care where someone is from and it would not usually factor into my decision on whether or not to hire them. In that particular case, I had no choice but to hire US citizens, though. Anyone else I hired wouldn't have been allowed in our building. AT least, that particular building we were working out of.
I can assure you that it is not just Debian that takes this approach. This story is getting a bit old, and perhaps things have changed, but I submitted a patch to kernel.org for a deadlock in the kernel with USB HID devices back in 2.10 and this simple (one line patch to remove a sleep with a spinlock) never got accepted. Even after I submitted it for 7 kernel versions in a row. Finally someone on the kernel team submitted the exact same patch and it instantly got accepted into the project. And guess how many times I tried to submit anything to kernel.org after that?
All police departments try to achieve zero crime. They constantly look for ways to detect criminals. This means they are constantly pushing the boundary of legal law enforcement methods, and sometimes they cross that line. The "Average" living room is beyond the reach of law enforcement. Only special living rooms justify surveilance (special = they have a reason for a warrant), meaning average living rooms are not bugged just like encrypted messages are not read. For most of human history what happened in private stayed private, so again this isn't a new situation for police and they know how to deal with it (lean on a person who has access to what you want).
But surely this is the first time in human existence that law enforcement has waged a war on mathematics? Until the elite are willing to limit their personal finances to 2^32 pennies, I will not give up my 256 bit AES or 2048 bit RSA. If we are going to put limits on math, we need to limit it everywhere
You programmed it, you built it, you set it up, you put it on the roads. Not your fault though.
It certainly could have done better but the human that was watching the movie inside the vehicle was supposed to be there to prevent this kind of catastrophe. Whether it is reasonable to expect a person to sit there and do nothing for hours at a time and then act in an emergency is another question that ought to be addressed. But I am sure that Uber would be held civilly liable for this, even if the criminal justice system has decided not to do anything.
I wonder, do these same people blame the cell phone company when they get a rude phone call or a telemarketer?
Actually, yes, I do. Most of the phone calls I get these days are spam calls that would be incredibly easy for the phone company to stop but they have zero incentive to actually fix because they make money for each of these spam calls.
You are going to their house and doing what you do, and they're just making note of what you did in their living room.
So... when they send their response to me and they include a 3rd party ad that is malicious and it is executed on my computer are they held liable for serving up a 3rd party ad? If they can do whatever they want while I am connected to their server then they need to be held liable for what they push to my computer.
I am going say Bad Apple on this one. As I stated on the other article I am not sure that this app really could do a lot of the things that are being claimed. Terrible for privacy sure, but apps implementing ATS and other best practices should still have been secure.
So now we have Apple essentially ban hammering an application outside the app store. Think about that. If you have an enterprise, and your write an application, to run on devices you have purchased; Apple might still come along and disable it; if they don't like you or it!
This isn't really good for users, this is really anti-freedom/anti-ownership type action here. Just because it might protect a few dolts from malicious actors like facebook, does not automatically make it good.
Uhhh do you know how Apple devices work? The people installing this app basically gave Facebook enterprise control of their devices. This means that Facebook had access to EVERYTHING. Installed apps, text messages, call history, location data, etc is all available to an enterprise owner of a device. This is why you should not use BYOD with your personal phone if the employer requires enterprise provisioning of the device. And most people, including yourself it seems, are unaware that such a capability exists and would not stop to consider the consequences of their actions. Apple ought to revoke all of Facebooks apps and development accounts over this but we know that won’t happen because Facebook will just pay to make this little sin go away.
I'm pretty sure the only people who really care about avoiding tracking are watching porn.:-)
I don’t watch Porn, okay. I am watching documentaries on human reproductive habits in the hopes that some day I might have the opportunity to spend at least 3 seconds attempting to reproduce those acts.
As with previous engineering and/or manufacturing defects (this seems like the former), Apple will no doubt adopt a policy of authorizing Warranty Repair no matter what on the MacBooks that exhibit these symptoms.
Now, if Apple then REFUSES to repair those units (even if out of Warranty, with or without AppleCare), THEN there's a story.
But at this point, this wouldn't even BE a story if it were Dell or Asus or Microsoft or HP or... ANYONE ELSE.
Typical Slashdot. Apple Hatred; nothing more.
Actually... I was just talking about this with someone the other day. Apple told them to just replace the laptop because it was unrepairable. They would not warranty repair it. The person took it to an unauthorized rep and found out that the pins for the backlight had bent away from the pad and the guy just resoldered the pins. Did it for free, too. He said that he couldn’t provide any sort of warranty as the pins appeared to receive so much stress that he felt that the cable would break eventually.
Yea, but you KNOW why this was even a story right? It's not for humor on "The Onion" or something.
This was reported, not because it is funny, but because it feeds the whole narrative being pushed about Trump by the punditry, because it serves to inflame the unthinking and keep the outrage alive in some about all the many ways he "cheated" is way into the Oval Office.
So I see why you find it funny, but I also see why it had enough traction to find it's way into Slashdot where "funny" isn't the point...
If this actually did happen then I have to question what lows Trump would stoop to just to become president. We are literally talking about a worthless poll that nobody really cares about. If he is willing to cheat on this to become a president, then I am sure that he did many other unethical things to get where he is now. But anyone who thought Trump was an ethical person prior to his presidential run was not paying attention to anything Trump actually does. He has quite an unsavory reputation in the business world for trying to cheat contractors out of everything he possibly can.
The house did pass a bill. It was never taken up for a vote with the senate. As far as the emergency nature of this, it does seem like this has immediate life threatening implications as the Streisand effect of this capability will likely lead to an ex boyfriend/girlfriend/whomever finding where someone is hiding and assaulting them.
Everyone time someone says that the meta data the government collects isn’t that important or, in this case, that allowing anyone to get real time location info on anyone else in the nation isn’t that important, I wish they would give me carte blanche to prove to them that it is not the case. Ajit had to hire a bunch of security guards because nobody likes him (outside of corporate board rooms). I would love to show him how dangerous this info is. But of course, doing something like that is illegal and I would get prosecuted for it without it actually fixing anything. I wish he’d just put his money where his mouth is and let someone prove him wrong.
Why does it have to be the U.S. government's job to produce a "World Magnetic Model"? If boats might collide, would it not be better for them to rely on more than one source for this information? This article was politically motivated. When I first saw this article appear, the page was also littered with climate change propaganda.
Why does Paris have to be responsible for defining the kilogram?
It isn't.
The organisation responsible for that is the International Committee for Weights and Measures. The original prototype was held in Pavillon de Breteuil in Saint-Cloud, but recently the KG has been redefined using Plank's Constant as a base. The Parisian government nor city of Paris have had no part in this what so ever aside from housing the prototypes.
Copies of the prototype are kept in various places around the world including one in a US NIST laboratory in Gaithersburg, Maryland.
I am aware that there is an international organization that actually officially defines the weight of a kilogram. I am also aware that it has been redefined using Plank’s Constant. However, that kilogram of platinum has been used as the “gold standard” of a kilogram for almost 150 years. And that redefinition of the kg does not even officially take place until May. But the mere fact of holding it in Paris has brought prestige to the city as it is mentioned any time someone refers to the prototype.
I'm an Air Force brat. In 1969.I watched with my family as Neil Armstrong took the first steps on the moon. That was an OMG moment, which set unfulfilled expectations for years to come. Instead of OMG moments, we've had a steady advance in tech, better every year, but never with an OMG moment like that.
So, I'm disappointed that I cannot vacation on Mars. At the same time, the steady tech revolution has changed the world far more than most of us would have thought possible.
In 1982, I took a philosophy class at UC Berkeley. For my final project, I predicted when the AI singularity would occur. My hypothesis was that we sim[y lacked the compute power, and when we had enough such that for $1M in 1982 dollars, any mainstream university could afford a neural network with the same capacity as a human brain, then some a-hole would come along and program it to actually be intelligent.
I predicted, based on Moore's Law, 2025....
My dad was a teenager in the 50s and somewhat of a hoarder. I had read enough back issues of Popular Mechanics and whatnot to know that the future was not going to be as amazing as the optimists predicted. I never got caught in the trap of thinking we would ever vacation on Mars or even the moon (though my parents were much much older when they had me and I missed Armstrong by a long shot). By the time I studied AI at university, I realized that most software people were far too optimistic about AI as well. I don't believe that the issue is a lack of computing power but really a lack of knowledge, understanding of true intelligence, and perhaps a little bit of a lack of imagination. AI has solved some difficult problems, such as object recognition and things of that nature, but is still quite short on intelligence.
Why does it have to be the U.S. government's job to produce a "World Magnetic Model"? If boats might collide, would it not be better for them to rely on more than one source for this information? This article was politically motivated. When I first saw this article appear, the page was also littered with climate change propaganda.
Why does Paris have to be responsible for defining the kilogram? NOAA puts out a model for US government and commercial use. The information is so useful that other countries have adopted it for their government and commercial use, also. Now the model is not being published because a big baby isn't getting money for a wall that he said would come from Mexico to begin with. Did you know that NOAA is also responsible for 99.999999% of the weather forecast data that is used by private business? And that the CDC helps manage food and water borne illness through the globe and not just in the US? All of those activities are of use to the world and publishing this information helps to improve business and commerce for US companies.
Could someone else publish this model? I am certain it is possible. But sometimes the prestige involved in having that come from your specific country is useful. I think it would be worthwhile for the US to continue to be the source of such useful scientific and commercial knowledge. Are you saying that we should let our position in this slide because of a border wall that nobody really needs? I mean, you are aware that over half of the illegal immigration that occurs these days is by airplane and people overstaying visas, right? My understanding is that the wall will not be high enough to prevent immigrants from coming over by air.
Women and men worked side by side in a lot of peasant life. Which accounts for most of humans throughout most of recorded history. And before recorded history we can assume they worked their separate roles as well, not as master slave. Do you see apes using a master slave hierarchy with their females?
Most countries during most times didn't treat women as property.
Sounds like a catchy phrase from a movie, doesn't stand up to logic or history though.
I don't know where you get your history from but most people in this era were property of their king and their lord. They were serfs who had almost no rights and could be treated as they wished. Your lack of historical knowledge does not translate into my being a misogynist or thinking that women are garbage. And never did I say that all men were complete primates and treated women like shit. But you go ahead and think whatever makes you happy. You can go ahead and pretend like practices like jus primae nocits ever existed or that nobles were allowed to do whatever they pleased while a woman could, in some cultures, be executed for promiscuity when men remained unpunished for the same crime. You probably fail to realize that there are still countries in existence that have laws like this as we speak.
This is the dumbest thing I've read all day. Are you getting some sort of weird sexual thrill imagining a bevy of beautiful naked women tied to posts, being forced to lick the male artist's brushes, and heaven knows what else?
I think you have the title for the dumbest thing anyone has written all day. And you are obviously the one who has weird sexual fetishes about women licking things. I am merely stating that women were most often treated as property and, while female artists have existed over the centuries, how many of them have created works that are considered to be fine art? I do not mean how many have created fine art, but how is their art perceived? Because the artistic work of women has been underappreciated even into modern society.
Because that's exactly what the bullshit you just wrote reads like.
Only to you, my friend, only to you.
You must have flunked art class. Artists over the millenniums have all licked their own brushes, and there are a number of different points that can be placed on a brush. No way the artist doing the work would have someone else lick their brushes.
Has there been some sort of historical record of brush licking that I have not found? Artists employed apprentices to do all kinds of prep work for them. I am sure that the prep work performed was entirely at the preference of the artist if they are skilled enough to be working with a pigment this expensive. And artists have all kinds of varying preferences just like every other human being on this planet.
The practice is pretty much discouraged today, as many of the pigments are poisonous.
In fact, if you want a modern day horror story regarding brush licking, the plight of the radium girls is illustrative:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radium_Girls . While this is sometimes used as a Casus belli against the patriarchy, it is an illustration of the reverse. We don't hear much about the plight of the men who produced the radium that poisoned these women - it is of no interest for some reason. Make no mistake, radiation is a true title 9 poison.
I am aware of the radium girls. While the work they did required a precise hand, they were not considered to be world class artists or they would be doing a completely different kind of work.
And did you consider that perhaps the radium girls were exposed to far more radiation and in a more harmful manner than the miners themselves? Naturally occurring radium mostly emits alpha particles. We all know that alpha particles rarely cause any harm unless they are released by an internal emitter. So imagine how nasty some ingested radium paint would be for a painter versus a miner who is wearing thick gloves and clothes as they work in a mine environment.
Anyway, I still stand by my point. The lapis lazuli in this woman’s mouth proves nothing except oral exposure to the paint. The only reason it could potentially point to her being an artist due to the fact that the finding was made in Germany, where convents were run by women and were institutes of learning. Had this finding occurred in England it would mean nothing because convents were run by men and were not always pleasant places to be.
Back then life was hard, and it is pretty solid common sense that gender was much LESS of an issue, as survival was a little higher up the priority list.
You do realize that women were considered property during this time, yes? First of their father and, upon marriage, of their husband? Most of the women in these monasteries were bastard children of upper class men. Others were the extra daughters that upper class men did not want to take care of financially. Fathers were expected to pay a dowry when their daughters were married. So to avoid that they stuck them in monestaries. But you are right, there was total gender equality back then.
Plus, lapis lazuli was imported from Afghanistan and was at times more valuable than gold so this woman was an illustrator of some very high end texts. What is important about this discovery is more than anything else that it constitutes proof of the fact that women, presumably nuns, as well as monks were involved in the production of the most splendid manuscripts of the time because nobody except a first rate illustrator would have something as obscenely expensive as lapis lazuli in their dental plaque.
All it proves is that women licked the brushes. Knowing the way that men have mistreated women over the centuries, I would not be surprised if a talented artist who didn't like to lick his own brush was given a woman to do the unpleasant task for him. I'm not saying that they did not have many female illustrators back then. Obviously no one has any idea how prevalent it was back then if this is such a big finding. But I think its silly to draw any sort of conclusion from this finding. Women had very few rights during this time and only the richest of families would have done much to educate their daughters.
Let me guess, you think we need a wall to protect us don't you?
No, we need a wall to protect us from him and others like him Without regulation you’d end up with the streets of NYC at the turn of the century 20th - where there were countless power lines running electricity from every different provider under the sun. The reason Google Fiber failed is because running fiber is incredibly expensive and disrupts the streets in the city hosting it. So the solution is for the city to own the fiber just like it owns the streets on top of the fiber. The city doesn’t need to be an ISP like Chatanooga, TN does. It just needs to provide equal access to the fiber to any company who is willing to pay for that access and that has a customer willing to buy their service. Then you would have a legitimate free market for fiber to the home.
However, you can’t easily do something like that with cellular service. Sure you could have each municipality own its own towers but then it gets incredibly complex to build a nationwide cellular network. Therefore you have to force the players to act in the customer’s best interest instead of their corporate interests.
They can figure out how many people a document is shared with and filter out the dumb spammers.
Then it is an arms race. All shared documents are associated with accounts. They can throttle down how much sharing you can do to young accounts. For older accounts they can build links of shared documents and shared editing history. With some amount of AI thrown, they can cut down a lot of spam.
Gmail is pretty good in filtering out spam. Google phone is pretty good in marking incoming calls as possible spam. So they will probably have a more sophisticated way than what a random guy like me posts after two minutes of thinking.
Are you sure that it is Android that is marking the call as spam? Who is your service provider? Many of them now mark the call as likely spam from their end using caller ID.
Outlook does this too, so it's not just google. Apparently the default for not responding is to harass you anyway. If I explicitly decline outlook invitations they go away, but if I don't bother to do anything with them, I get reminders.
If you actually respond to the event this won't happen with Outlook. Decline it if you don't want to hear about it, otherwise they just assume you're really bad at keeping up on your email.
Slashdot Mirror
There are many things about cars which you are legally obliged to do, or not do, despite you owning the car. It would be difficult to see how is significantly different.
I have never driven drunk. However, I dated a girl who had a boyfriend with an interlock and also have a friend that had an interlock. The technology is incredibly unreliable. And I don't mean unreliable from a BAC standpoint but from actually being able to start your car. And if the interlock device isn't working properly and you try to start your car? You get a huge fine and can potentially be thrown in jail. Not because you actually tried to drive drunk but because the device itself malfunctioned.
Cars are big, hard and move fast. It's not unreasonable that there are limitations put on these devices so that they are safe for everybody else.
Which is why we should make it more difficult to get a drivers license in the first place. I see hundreds of people on my commute every day that should not have a drivers license. I think they are a far larger risk to my personal safety and to society in general than the small number of drunk drivers, who, by the way, probably wouldn't have a drivers license in the first place if we made testing more difficult.
Did IQs suddenly drop while I was away? You could feed a family of four with what these cost. When they stop working you just throw them out?! I have a few decent $8 earbuds from over 5 years ago that still work and sound perfect to this day. In my opinion, they make people look ridiculous, at least Spock and Uhura's earpieces looked better on them than these things. I weep for the future.
How many $8 headphones does my dog have to rip out of my ears for this to be economical? About 20 pairs. Now realistically I used to spend about $10-12 a pair and my dog would accidentally destroy a pair once every 8-10 months. Not that she was trying to destroy them, but she gets excited and prances around me (not even jumping on me) and accidentally snags a dangling wire and now I've lost a pair of headphones and potentially damaged my phone. A good pair of bluetooth headphones will run you $120 easily. But it's a hell of a lot cheaper to throw these away than to have a phone destroyed because your dog ripped it out of your hands by the headphone wire. Thankfully she has never broken a phone.
I will say that prior to getting the dog I probably would go 5+ years per pair of headphones and was more likely to lose them than to ruin them.
Huh. Somebody who thinks the way an acronym's letters are pronounced in their respective words has ANYTHING AT ALL to do with how the acronym should be pronounced... is calling somebody *else* a moron? Funny.
Once again, the ONLY points that have any relevance whatsoever are:
1. The person who invents a technology deserves the right to name it, and only a total asshole would ignore their wishes.
2. The Cabal has authorized me to reveal that, for as long as the GIF format has existed, pronouncing "gif" correctly -- i.e., like "gin", not like "git" -- has been one of the not-so-secret recognition codes by which people who have any clue about computer stuff identify each other.
And he sure exercised his right to name it, didn't he? He named it the "Graphics Interchange Format". Not JIF, not GIF. And I've known he pronounced it like JIF since I was a kid but still refuse to do so. Why would I bother to try and confuse people with a peanut butter brand? SO that I can be an elitist asshole? No, I think I'll pronounce it how it is spelled. You're welcome to think I am ignorant for doing so, I really don't care.
"Dumbasses don't factory reset their Teslas, and leave a lot of personal info in them."
How hard was that?
You do realize that there could be situations where the computer is broken to the point where the owner cannot factory reset them yet they may still be in good enough shape that data can be extracted from the storage media, correct? You should never assume that the end user is able to factory reset. The data should be held encrypted on the device with something like a TPM that protects the encryption keys and requires a recovery key to be used once you remove the device from the car.
Because in the US he could sue them for discrimination AND WIN.
I see. Google tells me that "national origin" is a protected class in US federal employment discrimination law. Also citizenship status. This seems foolish. Is there really no exception for bona fide security concerns outside military contractors?
You can be quite sure the Chinese would not allow westerners anywhere near their corporate secrets.
You have no idea how absurd it is. I used to do work for the DoD that required US Citizenship. Was I allowed to ask people in an interview if they were US citizens? Nope. It was illegal. Never mind that the type of work we did required citizenship by law. We would have to find clever ways to determine if they were citizens. This is why most of those DoD jobs require active clearances to already be in the possession of the applicant.
To be clear, I don't really care where someone is from and it would not usually factor into my decision on whether or not to hire them. In that particular case, I had no choice but to hire US citizens, though. Anyone else I hired wouldn't have been allowed in our building. AT least, that particular building we were working out of.
I can assure you that it is not just Debian that takes this approach. This story is getting a bit old, and perhaps things have changed, but I submitted a patch to kernel.org for a deadlock in the kernel with USB HID devices back in 2.10 and this simple (one line patch to remove a sleep with a spinlock) never got accepted. Even after I submitted it for 7 kernel versions in a row. Finally someone on the kernel team submitted the exact same patch and it instantly got accepted into the project. And guess how many times I tried to submit anything to kernel.org after that?
All police departments try to achieve zero crime. They constantly look for ways to detect criminals. This means they are constantly pushing the boundary of legal law enforcement methods, and sometimes they cross that line. The "Average" living room is beyond the reach of law enforcement. Only special living rooms justify surveilance (special = they have a reason for a warrant), meaning average living rooms are not bugged just like encrypted messages are not read. For most of human history what happened in private stayed private, so again this isn't a new situation for police and they know how to deal with it (lean on a person who has access to what you want).
But surely this is the first time in human existence that law enforcement has waged a war on mathematics? Until the elite are willing to limit their personal finances to 2^32 pennies, I will not give up my 256 bit AES or 2048 bit RSA. If we are going to put limits on math, we need to limit it everywhere
You programmed it, you built it, you set it up, you put it on the roads. Not your fault though.
It certainly could have done better but the human that was watching the movie inside the vehicle was supposed to be there to prevent this kind of catastrophe. Whether it is reasonable to expect a person to sit there and do nothing for hours at a time and then act in an emergency is another question that ought to be addressed. But I am sure that Uber would be held civilly liable for this, even if the criminal justice system has decided not to do anything.
.
I wonder, do these same people blame the cell phone company when they get a rude phone call or a telemarketer?
Actually, yes, I do. Most of the phone calls I get these days are spam calls that would be incredibly easy for the phone company to stop but they have zero incentive to actually fix because they make money for each of these spam calls.
You are going to their house and doing what you do, and they're just making note of what you did in their living room.
So... when they send their response to me and they include a 3rd party ad that is malicious and it is executed on my computer are they held liable for serving up a 3rd party ad? If they can do whatever they want while I am connected to their server then they need to be held liable for what they push to my computer.
I am going say Bad Apple on this one. As I stated on the other article I am not sure that this app really could do a lot of the things that are being claimed. Terrible for privacy sure, but apps implementing ATS and other best practices should still have been secure.
So now we have Apple essentially ban hammering an application outside the app store. Think about that. If you have an enterprise, and your write an application, to run on devices you have purchased; Apple might still come along and disable it; if they don't like you or it!
This isn't really good for users, this is really anti-freedom/anti-ownership type action here. Just because it might protect a few dolts from malicious actors like facebook, does not automatically make it good.
Uhhh do you know how Apple devices work? The people installing this app basically gave Facebook enterprise control of their devices. This means that Facebook had access to EVERYTHING. Installed apps, text messages, call history, location data, etc is all available to an enterprise owner of a device. This is why you should not use BYOD with your personal phone if the employer requires enterprise provisioning of the device. And most people, including yourself it seems, are unaware that such a capability exists and would not stop to consider the consequences of their actions. Apple ought to revoke all of Facebooks apps and development accounts over this but we know that won’t happen because Facebook will just pay to make this little sin go away.
I'm pretty sure the only people who really care about avoiding tracking are watching porn. :-)
I don’t watch Porn, okay. I am watching documentaries on human reproductive habits in the hopes that some day I might have the opportunity to spend at least 3 seconds attempting to reproduce those acts.
As with previous engineering and/or manufacturing defects (this seems like the former), Apple will no doubt adopt a policy of authorizing Warranty Repair no matter what on the MacBooks that exhibit these symptoms.
Now, if Apple then REFUSES to repair those units (even if out of Warranty, with or without AppleCare), THEN there's a story.
But at this point, this wouldn't even BE a story if it were Dell or Asus or Microsoft or HP or... ANYONE ELSE.
Typical Slashdot. Apple Hatred; nothing more.
Actually... I was just talking about this with someone the other day. Apple told them to just replace the laptop because it was unrepairable. They would not warranty repair it. The person took it to an unauthorized rep and found out that the pins for the backlight had bent away from the pad and the guy just resoldered the pins. Did it for free, too. He said that he couldn’t provide any sort of warranty as the pins appeared to receive so much stress that he felt that the cable would break eventually.
Yea, but you KNOW why this was even a story right? It's not for humor on "The Onion" or something.
This was reported, not because it is funny, but because it feeds the whole narrative being pushed about Trump by the punditry, because it serves to inflame the unthinking and keep the outrage alive in some about all the many ways he "cheated" is way into the Oval Office.
So I see why you find it funny, but I also see why it had enough traction to find it's way into Slashdot where "funny" isn't the point...
If this actually did happen then I have to question what lows Trump would stoop to just to become president. We are literally talking about a worthless poll that nobody really cares about. If he is willing to cheat on this to become a president, then I am sure that he did many other unethical things to get where he is now. But anyone who thought Trump was an ethical person prior to his presidential run was not paying attention to anything Trump actually does. He has quite an unsavory reputation in the business world for trying to cheat contractors out of everything he possibly can.
The house did pass a bill. It was never taken up for a vote with the senate. As far as the emergency nature of this, it does seem like this has immediate life threatening implications as the Streisand effect of this capability will likely lead to an ex boyfriend/girlfriend/whomever finding where someone is hiding and assaulting them.
Everyone time someone says that the meta data the government collects isn’t that important or, in this case, that allowing anyone to get real time location info on anyone else in the nation isn’t that important, I wish they would give me carte blanche to prove to them that it is not the case. Ajit had to hire a bunch of security guards because nobody likes him (outside of corporate board rooms). I would love to show him how dangerous this info is. But of course, doing something like that is illegal and I would get prosecuted for it without it actually fixing anything. I wish he’d just put his money where his mouth is and let someone prove him wrong.
Why does it have to be the U.S. government's job to produce a "World Magnetic Model"? If boats might collide, would it not be better for them to rely on more than one source for this information? This article was politically motivated. When I first saw this article appear, the page was also littered with climate change propaganda.
Why does Paris have to be responsible for defining the kilogram?
It isn't. The organisation responsible for that is the International Committee for Weights and Measures. The original prototype was held in Pavillon de Breteuil in Saint-Cloud, but recently the KG has been redefined using Plank's Constant as a base. The Parisian government nor city of Paris have had no part in this what so ever aside from housing the prototypes. Copies of the prototype are kept in various places around the world including one in a US NIST laboratory in Gaithersburg, Maryland.
I am aware that there is an international organization that actually officially defines the weight of a kilogram. I am also aware that it has been redefined using Plank’s Constant. However, that kilogram of platinum has been used as the “gold standard” of a kilogram for almost 150 years. And that redefinition of the kg does not even officially take place until May. But the mere fact of holding it in Paris has brought prestige to the city as it is mentioned any time someone refers to the prototype.
I'm an Air Force brat. In 1969.I watched with my family as Neil Armstrong took the first steps on the moon. That was an OMG moment, which set unfulfilled expectations for years to come. Instead of OMG moments, we've had a steady advance in tech, better every year, but never with an OMG moment like that.
So, I'm disappointed that I cannot vacation on Mars. At the same time, the steady tech revolution has changed the world far more than most of us would have thought possible.
In 1982, I took a philosophy class at UC Berkeley. For my final project, I predicted when the AI singularity would occur. My hypothesis was that we sim[y lacked the compute power, and when we had enough such that for $1M in 1982 dollars, any mainstream university could afford a neural network with the same capacity as a human brain, then some a-hole would come along and program it to actually be intelligent.
I predicted, based on Moore's Law, 2025....
My dad was a teenager in the 50s and somewhat of a hoarder. I had read enough back issues of Popular Mechanics and whatnot to know that the future was not going to be as amazing as the optimists predicted. I never got caught in the trap of thinking we would ever vacation on Mars or even the moon (though my parents were much much older when they had me and I missed Armstrong by a long shot). By the time I studied AI at university, I realized that most software people were far too optimistic about AI as well. I don't believe that the issue is a lack of computing power but really a lack of knowledge, understanding of true intelligence, and perhaps a little bit of a lack of imagination. AI has solved some difficult problems, such as object recognition and things of that nature, but is still quite short on intelligence.
Why does it have to be the U.S. government's job to produce a "World Magnetic Model"? If boats might collide, would it not be better for them to rely on more than one source for this information? This article was politically motivated. When I first saw this article appear, the page was also littered with climate change propaganda.
Why does Paris have to be responsible for defining the kilogram? NOAA puts out a model for US government and commercial use. The information is so useful that other countries have adopted it for their government and commercial use, also. Now the model is not being published because a big baby isn't getting money for a wall that he said would come from Mexico to begin with. Did you know that NOAA is also responsible for 99.999999% of the weather forecast data that is used by private business? And that the CDC helps manage food and water borne illness through the globe and not just in the US? All of those activities are of use to the world and publishing this information helps to improve business and commerce for US companies.
Could someone else publish this model? I am certain it is possible. But sometimes the prestige involved in having that come from your specific country is useful. I think it would be worthwhile for the US to continue to be the source of such useful scientific and commercial knowledge. Are you saying that we should let our position in this slide because of a border wall that nobody really needs? I mean, you are aware that over half of the illegal immigration that occurs these days is by airplane and people overstaying visas, right? My understanding is that the wall will not be high enough to prevent immigrants from coming over by air.
Nope. Fake news.
Women and men worked side by side in a lot of peasant life. Which accounts for most of humans throughout most of recorded history. And before recorded history we can assume they worked their separate roles as well, not as master slave. Do you see apes using a master slave hierarchy with their females?
Most countries during most times didn't treat women as property.
Sounds like a catchy phrase from a movie, doesn't stand up to logic or history though.
I don't know where you get your history from but most people in this era were property of their king and their lord. They were serfs who had almost no rights and could be treated as they wished. Your lack of historical knowledge does not translate into my being a misogynist or thinking that women are garbage. And never did I say that all men were complete primates and treated women like shit. But you go ahead and think whatever makes you happy. You can go ahead and pretend like practices like jus primae nocits ever existed or that nobles were allowed to do whatever they pleased while a woman could, in some cultures, be executed for promiscuity when men remained unpunished for the same crime. You probably fail to realize that there are still countries in existence that have laws like this as we speak.
This is the dumbest thing I've read all day. Are you getting some sort of weird sexual thrill imagining a bevy of beautiful naked women tied to posts, being forced to lick the male artist's brushes, and heaven knows what else?
I think you have the title for the dumbest thing anyone has written all day. And you are obviously the one who has weird sexual fetishes about women licking things. I am merely stating that women were most often treated as property and, while female artists have existed over the centuries, how many of them have created works that are considered to be fine art? I do not mean how many have created fine art, but how is their art perceived? Because the artistic work of women has been underappreciated even into modern society.
Because that's exactly what the bullshit you just wrote reads like.
Only to you, my friend, only to you.
You must have flunked art class. Artists over the millenniums have all licked their own brushes, and there are a number of different points that can be placed on a brush. No way the artist doing the work would have someone else lick their brushes.
Has there been some sort of historical record of brush licking that I have not found? Artists employed apprentices to do all kinds of prep work for them. I am sure that the prep work performed was entirely at the preference of the artist if they are skilled enough to be working with a pigment this expensive. And artists have all kinds of varying preferences just like every other human being on this planet.
The practice is pretty much discouraged today, as many of the pigments are poisonous.
In fact, if you want a modern day horror story regarding brush licking, the plight of the radium girls is illustrative :https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radium_Girls . While this is sometimes used as a Casus belli against the patriarchy, it is an illustration of the reverse. We don't hear much about the plight of the men who produced the radium that poisoned these women - it is of no interest for some reason. Make no mistake, radiation is a true title 9 poison.
I am aware of the radium girls. While the work they did required a precise hand, they were not considered to be world class artists or they would be doing a completely different kind of work.
And did you consider that perhaps the radium girls were exposed to far more radiation and in a more harmful manner than the miners themselves? Naturally occurring radium mostly emits alpha particles. We all know that alpha particles rarely cause any harm unless they are released by an internal emitter. So imagine how nasty some ingested radium paint would be for a painter versus a miner who is wearing thick gloves and clothes as they work in a mine environment.
Anyway, I still stand by my point. The lapis lazuli in this woman’s mouth proves nothing except oral exposure to the paint. The only reason it could potentially point to her being an artist due to the fact that the finding was made in Germany, where convents were run by women and were institutes of learning. Had this finding occurred in England it would mean nothing because convents were run by men and were not always pleasant places to be.
Back then life was hard, and it is pretty solid common sense that gender was much LESS of an issue, as survival was a little higher up the priority list.
You do realize that women were considered property during this time, yes? First of their father and, upon marriage, of their husband? Most of the women in these monasteries were bastard children of upper class men. Others were the extra daughters that upper class men did not want to take care of financially. Fathers were expected to pay a dowry when their daughters were married. So to avoid that they stuck them in monestaries. But you are right, there was total gender equality back then.
Plus, lapis lazuli was imported from Afghanistan and was at times more valuable than gold so this woman was an illustrator of some very high end texts. What is important about this discovery is more than anything else that it constitutes proof of the fact that women, presumably nuns, as well as monks were involved in the production of the most splendid manuscripts of the time because nobody except a first rate illustrator would have something as obscenely expensive as lapis lazuli in their dental plaque.
All it proves is that women licked the brushes. Knowing the way that men have mistreated women over the centuries, I would not be surprised if a talented artist who didn't like to lick his own brush was given a woman to do the unpleasant task for him. I'm not saying that they did not have many female illustrators back then. Obviously no one has any idea how prevalent it was back then if this is such a big finding. But I think its silly to draw any sort of conclusion from this finding. Women had very few rights during this time and only the richest of families would have done much to educate their daughters.
So what is your answer? Let them run unchecked?
Let me guess, you think we need a wall to protect us don't you?
No, we need a wall to protect us from him and others like him Without regulation you’d end up with the streets of NYC at the turn of the century 20th - where there were countless power lines running electricity from every different provider under the sun. The reason Google Fiber failed is because running fiber is incredibly expensive and disrupts the streets in the city hosting it. So the solution is for the city to own the fiber just like it owns the streets on top of the fiber. The city doesn’t need to be an ISP like Chatanooga, TN does. It just needs to provide equal access to the fiber to any company who is willing to pay for that access and that has a customer willing to buy their service. Then you would have a legitimate free market for fiber to the home.
However, you can’t easily do something like that with cellular service. Sure you could have each municipality own its own towers but then it gets incredibly complex to build a nationwide cellular network. Therefore you have to force the players to act in the customer’s best interest instead of their corporate interests.
They can figure out how many people a document is shared with and filter out the dumb spammers.
Then it is an arms race. All shared documents are associated with accounts. They can throttle down how much sharing you can do to young accounts. For older accounts they can build links of shared documents and shared editing history. With some amount of AI thrown, they can cut down a lot of spam.
Gmail is pretty good in filtering out spam. Google phone is pretty good in marking incoming calls as possible spam. So they will probably have a more sophisticated way than what a random guy like me posts after two minutes of thinking.
Are you sure that it is Android that is marking the call as spam? Who is your service provider? Many of them now mark the call as likely spam from their end using caller ID.
Outlook does this too, so it's not just google. Apparently the default for not responding is to harass you anyway. If I explicitly decline outlook invitations they go away, but if I don't bother to do anything with them, I get reminders.
If you actually respond to the event this won't happen with Outlook. Decline it if you don't want to hear about it, otherwise they just assume you're really bad at keeping up on your email.