Apple is using the first amendment to essentially help them run a public relations campaign. If software is speech, then it can't be patented or protected as intellectual property. If they don't want to cooperate with the government, fine, say that. But don't try to get high and mighty and act like your "rights" are being revoked. I seem to recall Apple having no problem cooperating with the Chinese government. They weren't worried about their free speech rights so much when it meant access to a billion person person market. I've also seen precedent where real, undisputable, free speech rights get revoked when it's convenient for everyone. Apple was ordered, by a court, to work with the government to help prosecute a crime. If a sysadmin can go to jail for withholding passwords, then Apple should to.
There is a way to do this. What seems unknown is actually what would be involved... technically. At least unknown to most. If you have an idea of what's involved id be happy to hear it. Could Apple do this without compromising everyone? From what I know, I wouldn't see why not. Should they? In this case, probably not. When presented with a warrant from a federal court? I don't see what gives technology a special pass that virtually no other area of personal privacy enjoys. You lose your right to privacy when there's reasonable suspicion you're a criminal. This has always been true.
Poor management policies. The average manager is taught to value rote punctuality heavily over anything else. Employee morale is usually the very last thing they care about. The gradual atrophy of the quality of the business degree is slowly ruining western society. It's time to rethink the hardcore capitalist approach to everything. An incentive based management policy with more relaxed code of conduct will produce far better employees than treating everyone like a disposable robot, even if that's all they are to you.
Why would anyone help crowd fund a car from a well established for-profit company? Do you just like gambling with your money? Here's a tip people: when the thing is actually finished, it will still be for sale.
Or gmail/gapps at all. My favorite thing ever is when I get calls from IT departments that can't send us email because a gmail or outlook IP got registered for spamming. I simply reply "hmm... our dedicated self hosted transfer agent has never been on a list. I wonder why?" Perhaps it's because we don't outsource the critical workflow of our company. If this story is even true (i suspect it isn't) it looks good on gmail users.
After all that, fix the God damned mobile site. My slashdotting is entirely done on my phone using the desktop interface. Not because I dislike the mobile interface look, but because it lacks similar functionality. Minor things like not being able to collapse comments makes it almost unusable. The first rule of mobile interfaces is they need to have the same functionality as the desktop. It's no surprise the hipsters at dice didn't know this. Now let's move forward.
Systemd is a program. It's the first program the kernel calls after it's done it's work. There are several programs available that do the work of systemd. How could Linus (a single Sr developer on a world wide project) enforce anyone's choice of program through the kernel? Sheer will?
Virtually all distribution maintainers, from institutional to consumer grade, have moved their supported init system to systemd. There's nothing stopping you from using initd or upstart if that's your preference, but you'd better get used to writing startup scripts.
It's not a surprise. "Studies", as in those referenced on the internet or published in convenience store magazines, routinely have such poor scientific standards it's alarming. What's worse is they falsely carry the authority of real scientific investigation to reinforce all sorts of misplaced ideals and baseless myths.
Fair enough. I guess I just like money too much. Considering that an au pair can be had for 1200-1500 a month in most cases (far cheaper than a nanny) the potential savings of 1700-2000 are pretty attractive. That would put any car you wanted in the driveway, or shave 10-20 years off your retirement age. He did say he values the social interactions his kids get at school, so I can't argue with that.
Not good enough. Our society has a problem assuming regulations and laws are the first solution, when they should always be the last. If you can fix a problem without creating an expensive, corruptable bureaucracy around it, shouldn't you do that instead?
And let the world economy that's dependant on the US banking cartel fend for themselves right? The problem is systemic. Even if "letting the banks fail" could fix the problem (it almost for sure couldn't, and would just make it worse) it's a scenario that's destined to repeat itself. It's time people stop fighting over which of the two laziest polar opposite approaches is best and actually think of real solutions.
An analogy I like is comparing the banking system to gangreen. While your solution of cutting off the limb certainly might work, it's not without repercussions. And as you know, there's ways to treat gangrene and keep all our limb in tact.
I couldn't agree more. I would add that during the process you described, the government should have made it their first priority to correct the issues in monetary policy that caused this. Not through regulations and increased bureaucracy but through identifying the systemic causes and creating policy to correct the root of the problem. The ultimate conclusion would have been nationalizing the central bank and money creation process through a slow but steady increase of the fractional reserve requirement. The central bank could then have exclusive "new money" lending rights by maintaining a central credit database, and registering private banks as brokers of new money loans instead of creators.
You make rampant deflation with human psychology. When institutional banks fail, they have too large a contribution in the money creation cycle. They call in all loans, stop generating new loans, and the entire banking system follows suit; a credit freeze. Investors and business people know the impacts of a credit freeze means spiralling deflation so they close the door and shut off everything. Asset values plummet. You might think "fine, but prices and wages just scale downwards to compensate for the reduced money supply", but this isn't the case. Humans are not rational and our psychology does not work that way. The end result is that you can't buy or sell a thing until the spiral is controlled. This is what happened in 1929, and many times before that. It's the reason for the central bank and central bank policies. The only option is to inflate the the currency to offset. Could the government have let the banks fail and bailed out the economy through cash injections in social programs, infrastructure spending, etc? Maybe, but the government doesn't actually control the central bank. It's a private institution run by a private banking cartel. If they fail, it does too.
Cute, but I think you know this isn't accurate. The worst thing that can happen to any currency is rampant deflation. It serves to make it useless, just like rampant *in*flation, but the impact is even worse. When there's not enough money supply to service incomes and day to day transactions the entire economy of labor shuts down, potentially overnight. Add that to the fact that most of the world pegs the value of their currency (either directly or indirectly) to the US dollar and you'll understand why the bailout wasn't an option, it was a necessity. Once you understand that, then you should understand why nearly every political issue up for debate should be taking a back seat to monetary policy and banking reform.
Disagree. Apple and Nintendo are too similar in their desire for control, they'd never get along. Furthermore, that controlling attitude is what's hurting them, so the last thing they need is more of it. Independent developers are ruling the field right now. They need to open up their sdk to the masses and remove development restrictions on their platform. So, in essence, they need to be less like Apple, not more.
If I was undertaxed amidst evidence of crumbling infrastructure and record wealth gaps, I wouldn't volunteer to pay more tax, that would do nothing. Instead, I would invest in local charities, which I'm sure these people are doing.
While I'm at it, I might consider starting a movement to bring attention to these systemic problems. I could get additional assistance from local governments and other people that are as fortunate as me by explaining, through leadership, that many of these problems could be helped by my friends and I paying more taxes. No doubt I'd still get chastised from ignorant people that are perpetually critical of my economic class, but it would be the best I can do.
Changing societies views? Spoken like a true despot. A culture is not something that can be formed by micro management, at least not with very good results. You don't have to look far back in history to see this. If your, and your "movements", end goal is to change society through micro managing policies and behaviors throughout all layers of their lives, then perhaps you should lead with that. Of course rational people won't get behind something like that so it's much more effective to hide behind morality and professionalism. Thanks anyways for confirming what this movement is truly about. I think I'll continue to preach to my children and community the importance of promoting an organic culture through egalitarian politics, rather than being deluded to following despotic thought police, no matter how benevolent they claim to be.
Slashdot Mirror
Apple is using the first amendment to essentially help them run a public relations campaign. If software is speech, then it can't be patented or protected as intellectual property. If they don't want to cooperate with the government, fine, say that. But don't try to get high and mighty and act like your "rights" are being revoked. I seem to recall Apple having no problem cooperating with the Chinese government. They weren't worried about their free speech rights so much when it meant access to a billion person person market. I've also seen precedent where real, undisputable, free speech rights get revoked when it's convenient for everyone. Apple was ordered, by a court, to work with the government to help prosecute a crime. If a sysadmin can go to jail for withholding passwords, then Apple should to.
There is a way to do this. What seems unknown is actually what would be involved... technically. At least unknown to most. If you have an idea of what's involved id be happy to hear it. Could Apple do this without compromising everyone? From what I know, I wouldn't see why not. Should they? In this case, probably not. When presented with a warrant from a federal court? I don't see what gives technology a special pass that virtually no other area of personal privacy enjoys. You lose your right to privacy when there's reasonable suspicion you're a criminal. This has always been true.
You beat me to it. I still don't know if it erases even 1% of the ham they've caused, but it's at least something.
Poor management policies. The average manager is taught to value rote punctuality heavily over anything else. Employee morale is usually the very last thing they care about. The gradual atrophy of the quality of the business degree is slowly ruining western society. It's time to rethink the hardcore capitalist approach to everything. An incentive based management policy with more relaxed code of conduct will produce far better employees than treating everyone like a disposable robot, even if that's all they are to you.
Downloading now. Now I get to look extra stupid if the ISO boots to a splash screen saying April Fools.
Why would anyone help crowd fund a car from a well established for-profit company? Do you just like gambling with your money? Here's a tip people: when the thing is actually finished, it will still be for sale.
Or gmail/gapps at all. My favorite thing ever is when I get calls from IT departments that can't send us email because a gmail or outlook IP got registered for spamming. I simply reply "hmm... our dedicated self hosted transfer agent has never been on a list. I wonder why?" Perhaps it's because we don't outsource the critical workflow of our company. If this story is even true (i suspect it isn't) it looks good on gmail users.
articles that start with "study says" are utter drivel.
After all that, fix the God damned mobile site. My slashdotting is entirely done on my phone using the desktop interface. Not because I dislike the mobile interface look, but because it lacks similar functionality. Minor things like not being able to collapse comments makes it almost unusable. The first rule of mobile interfaces is they need to have the same functionality as the desktop. It's no surprise the hipsters at dice didn't know this. Now let's move forward.
Systemd is a program. It's the first program the kernel calls after it's done it's work. There are several programs available that do the work of systemd. How could Linus (a single Sr developer on a world wide project) enforce anyone's choice of program through the kernel? Sheer will?
Virtually all distribution maintainers, from institutional to consumer grade, have moved their supported init system to systemd. There's nothing stopping you from using initd or upstart if that's your preference, but you'd better get used to writing startup scripts.
It's not a surprise. "Studies", as in those referenced on the internet or published in convenience store magazines, routinely have such poor scientific standards it's alarming. What's worse is they falsely carry the authority of real scientific investigation to reinforce all sorts of misplaced ideals and baseless myths.
To be fair, the word "study" has lost all scientific credibility a long time ago. It can basically be read as "opinion" or "guess".
Fair enough. I guess I just like money too much. Considering that an au pair can be had for 1200-1500 a month in most cases (far cheaper than a nanny) the potential savings of 1700-2000 are pretty attractive. That would put any car you wanted in the driveway, or shave 10-20 years off your retirement age. He did say he values the social interactions his kids get at school, so I can't argue with that.
The word "study" has lost all scientific credibility. It should almost always be read as "opinion" or "guess".
You pay $3200 a month in daycare? Thank me later.
"We're going to artificially slow our release cycle to squeeze as much money out of the consumer as possible."
Of course they've already been doing this all along. As we rapidly approach the size of a molecule the new frontier will just be power consumption.
Not good enough. Our society has a problem assuming regulations and laws are the first solution, when they should always be the last. If you can fix a problem without creating an expensive, corruptable bureaucracy around it, shouldn't you do that instead?
And let the world economy that's dependant on the US banking cartel fend for themselves right? The problem is systemic. Even if "letting the banks fail" could fix the problem (it almost for sure couldn't, and would just make it worse) it's a scenario that's destined to repeat itself. It's time people stop fighting over which of the two laziest polar opposite approaches is best and actually think of real solutions.
An analogy I like is comparing the banking system to gangreen. While your solution of cutting off the limb certainly might work, it's not without repercussions. And as you know, there's ways to treat gangrene and keep all our limb in tact.
I couldn't agree more. I would add that during the process you described, the government should have made it their first priority to correct the issues in monetary policy that caused this. Not through regulations and increased bureaucracy but through identifying the systemic causes and creating policy to correct the root of the problem. The ultimate conclusion would have been nationalizing the central bank and money creation process through a slow but steady increase of the fractional reserve requirement. The central bank could then have exclusive "new money" lending rights by maintaining a central credit database, and registering private banks as brokers of new money loans instead of creators.
You make rampant deflation with human psychology. When institutional banks fail, they have too large a contribution in the money creation cycle. They call in all loans, stop generating new loans, and the entire banking system follows suit; a credit freeze. Investors and business people know the impacts of a credit freeze means spiralling deflation so they close the door and shut off everything. Asset values plummet. You might think "fine, but prices and wages just scale downwards to compensate for the reduced money supply", but this isn't the case. Humans are not rational and our psychology does not work that way. The end result is that you can't buy or sell a thing until the spiral is controlled. This is what happened in 1929, and many times before that. It's the reason for the central bank and central bank policies. The only option is to inflate the the currency to offset. Could the government have let the banks fail and bailed out the economy through cash injections in social programs, infrastructure spending, etc? Maybe, but the government doesn't actually control the central bank. It's a private institution run by a private banking cartel. If they fail, it does too.
Cute, but I think you know this isn't accurate. The worst thing that can happen to any currency is rampant deflation. It serves to make it useless, just like rampant *in*flation, but the impact is even worse. When there's not enough money supply to service incomes and day to day transactions the entire economy of labor shuts down, potentially overnight. Add that to the fact that most of the world pegs the value of their currency (either directly or indirectly) to the US dollar and you'll understand why the bailout wasn't an option, it was a necessity. Once you understand that, then you should understand why nearly every political issue up for debate should be taking a back seat to monetary policy and banking reform.
Disagree. Apple and Nintendo are too similar in their desire for control, they'd never get along. Furthermore, that controlling attitude is what's hurting them, so the last thing they need is more of it. Independent developers are ruling the field right now. They need to open up their sdk to the masses and remove development restrictions on their platform. So, in essence, they need to be less like Apple, not more.
If I was undertaxed amidst evidence of crumbling infrastructure and record wealth gaps, I wouldn't volunteer to pay more tax, that would do nothing. Instead, I would invest in local charities, which I'm sure these people are doing.
While I'm at it, I might consider starting a movement to bring attention to these systemic problems. I could get additional assistance from local governments and other people that are as fortunate as me by explaining, through leadership, that many of these problems could be helped by my friends and I paying more taxes. No doubt I'd still get chastised from ignorant people that are perpetually critical of my economic class, but it would be the best I can do.
What a load of marketing garbage. This company continues to prove it either has no shame, or no clue.
Changing societies views? Spoken like a true despot. A culture is not something that can be formed by micro management, at least not with very good results. You don't have to look far back in history to see this. If your, and your "movements", end goal is to change society through micro managing policies and behaviors throughout all layers of their lives, then perhaps you should lead with that. Of course rational people won't get behind something like that so it's much more effective to hide behind morality and professionalism. Thanks anyways for confirming what this movement is truly about. I think I'll continue to preach to my children and community the importance of promoting an organic culture through egalitarian politics, rather than being deluded to following despotic thought police, no matter how benevolent they claim to be.