Of course it's not just a lease. It as "-as-a-service" right there in the name! That means it's 10 times more expensive than something that's "just a lease".
This is the underlying problem. It's not that we can't tell who is appropriate for jail and who is not, it's that jail is most often the only option available. There's nowhere to else send people who are mentally ill or suffering from addiction, so jail it is.
No amount of data analytics will solve that problem.
No, a "value proposition" is the total amount of value involved when you take the benefit (the $50) and subtract the value of what you're giving up for that benefit. That value, in this case, is completely subjective -- and for me, it's worth a lot more than $50 -- so the value proposition is negative dollars. Other people place a different value on what they're being asked to give up. For them, the value proposition is different. That's completely legitimate.
Actually, I consider $50 to be a lot of money. It's not that I don't think $50 is valuable, it's that I think that what Amazon is asking of me is worth a lot more (to me) than $50.
My lock screen gives me important information I use regularly, so I look at it frequently. But that's not even the point. The real cost, in my view, is the tracking that comes along with the ads.
Yeah, you could play guessing games. I guess that could be fun. What a normal person would do, however, is compare prices for identical products across several stores in the area to see if the stores which offer discount cards have generally higher prices than their competitors.
Now why would you think I hadn't done this? I have. The vast majority of stores in my area that use affinity cards tend to have higher prices across the board from those that don't. Not all of them do, but most. Enough that it works as a rule of thumb for stores I'm not familiar with.
Also, there's no conspiracy theory involved here at all, let alone a crazy one.
Yes, I agree. Amazon isn't doing anything wrong here as near as I can see. It's not even in the ballpark of anything I would personally be OK with, but nobody's being deceived or coerced.
Yup. But there might be a sliver of hope here. I don't use loyalty cards, and I avoid shopping at places that offer them because of what you just said: the odds are overwhelming that everything in the place is overpriced. Instead, I go to a store that doesn't use loyalty cards (they aren't as rare as you might think, at least in my area).
Or perhaps not. My personal expectation is the same as yours, that phones that don't unduly track me, or on which I can install my own OS, are going to be available but cost more and more over time. But I try, despite all evidence, to remain optimistic.
I presume that you must use Amazon's lock screen, which means no third-party ones. $50 off the purchase of two phones in exchange for no longer being able to use the lockscreen of my choice and having ads on it?
I know it is unwelcome but I could see writing a very similar application. The API request for GPS location failed, fine give me the general location information the OS cobbles together
Why would you think it's OK to act in such a dishonest way as to intentionally bypass the express wishes of your users?
How is this really different than running geo-location on an IP to see where a visitor to your website is coming from?
It's a very, very different thing to geolocate an IP address someone is coming from vs snooping on what WiFi AP broadcasts the user's machine is seeing. For one very obvious thing, people can and do use tactics to ensure that the geolocation of the IP address will be incorrect.
I find these types of regulations are too close to thought police for my comfort.
How do regulations that try to ensure that customer's express wishes are honored count as "thought police"?
Too many companies have attitudes similar to what you're expressing here, which is a large part of why I cannot trust any apps, and firewall them off to ensure they don't phone home or talk to advertising networks.
The true and honest answer: because that increases the build cost by a fraction cent, and when you're making millions of something, those fractions add up. Manufacturers realized that removing the shutters did not effect sales, so away they went.
What you say is true, but my counterargument is that multiple layers of security are always desirable. Let's say you've locked down your laptop but someone manages to hack in and install malware anyway. It would be very nice if the malware was as limited in effect as possible between installation and your discover of it.
I think that I actively miss IrDA streaming at least once a month. It was so much more convenient for rare, transitory communication needs than Bluetooth or Wifi.
Never. They stopped putting physical shutters over the cameras to save a fraction of a penny, I can't see them adding something even more expensive than that back in.
A camera is also a thing that can easily pointed to elsewhere.
My laptop camera is fixed, always facing the same direction of the screen. It's not possible to point it away from me and still use the laptop.
What is worrying is the microphone.
I physically disable mine by unplugging (if possible) or cutting (if not) the leads going to it. I have never seen a need to use a soldering iron, as every laptop I've had has leads that can be disabled. If I find one that does not, then I'd desolder it.
I don't disable the microphone on my phone, for obvious reasons, but I do root it and install a firewall that prevents any TCP/IP traffic from entering or leaving my phone without my explicit permission. It's not a perfect solution, but security always involves a compromise convenience/utility -- and that particular compromise is one I find acceptable.
Slashdot Mirror
It may be flexible, but it's still just a lease.
Of course it's not just a lease. It as "-as-a-service" right there in the name! That means it's 10 times more expensive than something that's "just a lease".
That's a nice, specific little clarification of the larger life rule: never trust anyone who says "trust me".
"teach you a lesson" means punishment.
To you and a lot of people, yes. But in reality it does not. Punishing people, all by itself, teaches them nothing.
This is the underlying problem. It's not that we can't tell who is appropriate for jail and who is not, it's that jail is most often the only option available. There's nowhere to else send people who are mentally ill or suffering from addiction, so jail it is.
No amount of data analytics will solve that problem.
It's supposed to teach you a lesson to not commit crime
No, it's not. We as a nation gave up on that purpose decades ago. Now, its main purpose is retribution rather than rehabilitation.
This will only end in tears for everyone who is not a data analytics firm.
No, a "value proposition" is the total amount of value involved when you take the benefit (the $50) and subtract the value of what you're giving up for that benefit. That value, in this case, is completely subjective -- and for me, it's worth a lot more than $50 -- so the value proposition is negative dollars. Other people place a different value on what they're being asked to give up. For them, the value proposition is different. That's completely legitimate.
Actually, I consider $50 to be a lot of money. It's not that I don't think $50 is valuable, it's that I think that what Amazon is asking of me is worth a lot more (to me) than $50.
Maybe, maybe not, but I have no reason to trust that is true. This is a point ad companies are often deceptive about.
Microsoft would do well to start adhering to those principles itself before worrying about applying them to AI.
You mean there are people who actually care about the EULA and warranty??
How often do you "watch" your lock screen?
My lock screen gives me important information I use regularly, so I look at it frequently. But that's not even the point. The real cost, in my view, is the tracking that comes along with the ads.
Yeah, you could play guessing games. I guess that could be fun. What a normal person would do, however, is compare prices for identical products across several stores in the area to see if the stores which offer discount cards have generally higher prices than their competitors.
Now why would you think I hadn't done this? I have. The vast majority of stores in my area that use affinity cards tend to have higher prices across the board from those that don't. Not all of them do, but most. Enough that it works as a rule of thumb for stores I'm not familiar with.
Also, there's no conspiracy theory involved here at all, let alone a crazy one.
Yes, I agree. Amazon isn't doing anything wrong here as near as I can see. It's not even in the ballpark of anything I would personally be OK with, but nobody's being deceived or coerced.
Yup. But there might be a sliver of hope here. I don't use loyalty cards, and I avoid shopping at places that offer them because of what you just said: the odds are overwhelming that everything in the place is overpriced. Instead, I go to a store that doesn't use loyalty cards (they aren't as rare as you might think, at least in my area).
Or perhaps not. My personal expectation is the same as yours, that phones that don't unduly track me, or on which I can install my own OS, are going to be available but cost more and more over time. But I try, despite all evidence, to remain optimistic.
I presume that you must use Amazon's lock screen, which means no third-party ones. $50 off the purchase of two phones in exchange for no longer being able to use the lockscreen of my choice and having ads on it?
I simply don't see the value proposition there.
I know it is unwelcome but I could see writing a very similar application. The API request for GPS location failed, fine give me the general location information the OS cobbles together
Why would you think it's OK to act in such a dishonest way as to intentionally bypass the express wishes of your users?
How is this really different than running geo-location on an IP to see where a visitor to your website is coming from?
It's a very, very different thing to geolocate an IP address someone is coming from vs snooping on what WiFi AP broadcasts the user's machine is seeing. For one very obvious thing, people can and do use tactics to ensure that the geolocation of the IP address will be incorrect.
I find these types of regulations are too close to thought police for my comfort.
How do regulations that try to ensure that customer's express wishes are honored count as "thought police"?
Too many companies have attitudes similar to what you're expressing here, which is a large part of why I cannot trust any apps, and firewall them off to ensure they don't phone home or talk to advertising networks.
The true and honest answer: because that increases the build cost by a fraction cent, and when you're making millions of something, those fractions add up. Manufacturers realized that removing the shutters did not effect sales, so away they went.
What you say is true, but my counterargument is that multiple layers of security are always desirable. Let's say you've locked down your laptop but someone manages to hack in and install malware anyway. It would be very nice if the malware was as limited in effect as possible between installation and your discover of it.
All this makes me miss IrDA beaming.
I think that I actively miss IrDA streaming at least once a month. It was so much more convenient for rare, transitory communication needs than Bluetooth or Wifi.
Yes, this. I just inventoried the half dozen laptops that are near me right now, and not one of them has a camera LED.
Never. They stopped putting physical shutters over the cameras to save a fraction of a penny, I can't see them adding something even more expensive than that back in.
No! He'd just ruin it.
A camera is also a thing that can easily pointed to elsewhere.
My laptop camera is fixed, always facing the same direction of the screen. It's not possible to point it away from me and still use the laptop.
What is worrying is the microphone.
I physically disable mine by unplugging (if possible) or cutting (if not) the leads going to it. I have never seen a need to use a soldering iron, as every laptop I've had has leads that can be disabled. If I find one that does not, then I'd desolder it.
I don't disable the microphone on my phone, for obvious reasons, but I do root it and install a firewall that prevents any TCP/IP traffic from entering or leaving my phone without my explicit permission. It's not a perfect solution, but security always involves a compromise convenience/utility -- and that particular compromise is one I find acceptable.