I'm as upset as you are, but let's face it, we're dealing with 8-10 year old processors here. Yes, for many applications still way more than good enough, but still. I think it's asking a bit much to expect patches for hardware that is about 3-4 generations old.
Price isn't a deciding factor here, unless of course part of that price was the promise of support above and beyond what could reasonably be expected.
What a company does is dictated by the amount of money it costs them and the amount of money it makes them. Nothing else. Your example first of all assumes that there is another bank with better security and that enough customers care about it to offset the loss of revenue from information sales.
What we're talking here is VASTLY more money being made by selling that private information. Even if FB wasn't the biggest privacy wholeseller but had the size of what's left of MySpace, it would STILL be more profitable to trade user information than "doing the right thing".
If you think that something like this can regulate itself, you're deluded.
Importing cheap semiconductors to the EU, designing and assembling my technology in Romania and then selling the finished product to the US could well be cheaper and more profitable than producing it in China and importing it directly from China to the US because the tariffs are going to even out the cents I have to pay the Romanians more? And all that without risking having my designs stolen so the Chinese could crank out cheap knockoffs?
On behalf of the EU, I wish to express my gratitude towards dear leader across the pond.
Apple computers were something that you could buy and hand to your grandma, with little more concern than doing a backup of her stuff from time to time just in case. Not because it was necessary because even if she fucked up, there was nearly no way she could possibly actually cause any damage.
It kinda went downhill when Timmy took over. What you have now is the stability of Windows with the elitist attitude and compatibility of Linux.
When conservatives can use "religious nutjob" as a way to distance themselves from their fringe off-the-deep-end idiots, so can liberals use SJWs to do the same.
There's sane people and insane people on both sides of the spectrum. Not embracing everyone "on my side" as my ally is the first step to getting to a way you can cooperate with the other side. You'll notice that they, too, have their loonies and once you separate them from the sane ones, you can find a common ground to work on.
It was not national. Hitler claimed to wanted to get the "German lands and blood home to the Reich", then let Italy have Southern Tyrol (mostly inhabited by people of German descent) so Mussolini held still when he cashed in Austria. He accepted splitting Poland with Russia, knowing well that in the areas around East Prussia a lot of Germans were deported after those parts of Poland fell to Russia. He didn't give a shit about this or that "German" territory as long as it furthered his plans.
He was not a socialist. That part of the party name was there to sway the communists and socialists to accept it as "well, just as fine". He brought back the "Arbeitsbuch", which basically put any worker at his employer's mercy.
The whole shit was not German. Although that bit could still be seen as "mostly correct". Hitler himself was Austrian and as history will easily show, the activity was not limited to Germany. No matter what borders you want to use, even the Holy Roman Empire at its greatest expansion was hardly what he wanted to conquer.
It was not a workers party. It had most of its backing from industrial and financial leaders like Krupp and Thyssen who did foresee his plans for rearmament and were (rightfully) hoping for large orders. Of course if you take money from the industry, you can hardly be a worker's hearo.
And finally, it wasn't really a party. It was a one person dictatorship with cronies orbiting around him, hoping that being close to the Fuerer would further their career.
Lemme guess, your boss bought some snakeoil peddler's spin who wanted to sell you a lot of "courses" and "consulting"?
Most EU laws by default contain clauses and provisions for commensurability. Which basically means that what you have to do is proportional to what you want to do. The privacy concerns and security required to store a few mail addresses of people who explicitly handed you their mail address so you can contact them is trivial.
It's a considerably different matter when you store everything about people and all their friends and connections.
Judges in Europe have a LOT of leeway when it comes to interpreting the law. And they generally do it with some sanity.
Would be interesting to try. Tell them to delete everything they have from you without disclosing what is "you", then sue when they don't find all your phone numbers and mail addresses.
"Your honor, I did comply with many parts of the law. I did not kill, maim, threaten or cause other bodily harm to the absent couple when I broke into their home".
Why do you ask Facebook if they would apply the privacy laws used against them in areas where they don't have to? That's like asking a criminal if he's not going to rob a home in areas where robbery is legal.
Slashdot Mirror
Live by the QWORD, die by the QWORD.
I'm as upset as you are, but let's face it, we're dealing with 8-10 year old processors here. Yes, for many applications still way more than good enough, but still. I think it's asking a bit much to expect patches for hardware that is about 3-4 generations old.
Price isn't a deciding factor here, unless of course part of that price was the promise of support above and beyond what could reasonably be expected.
What a company does is dictated by the amount of money it costs them and the amount of money it makes them. Nothing else. Your example first of all assumes that there is another bank with better security and that enough customers care about it to offset the loss of revenue from information sales.
What we're talking here is VASTLY more money being made by selling that private information. Even if FB wasn't the biggest privacy wholeseller but had the size of what's left of MySpace, it would STILL be more profitable to trade user information than "doing the right thing".
If you think that something like this can regulate itself, you're deluded.
Importing cheap semiconductors to the EU, designing and assembling my technology in Romania and then selling the finished product to the US could well be cheaper and more profitable than producing it in China and importing it directly from China to the US because the tariffs are going to even out the cents I have to pay the Romanians more? And all that without risking having my designs stolen so the Chinese could crank out cheap knockoffs?
On behalf of the EU, I wish to express my gratitude towards dear leader across the pond.
That used to be the truth for Apple.
Apple computers were something that you could buy and hand to your grandma, with little more concern than doing a backup of her stuff from time to time just in case. Not because it was necessary because even if she fucked up, there was nearly no way she could possibly actually cause any damage.
It kinda went downhill when Timmy took over. What you have now is the stability of Windows with the elitist attitude and compatibility of Linux.
It does!
It just stops working at some point.
So will I, soon. Well, as soon as this got a revision or two.
Does Apple offer a comparable product?
It's really become necessary to use that many words to say it?
It's more that I don't care.
I like my shooters like my crooked politicians: Amateurish and too inapt to pull it off successfully.
Do you have a YouTube Channel? I need debunking material and it seems you could deliver beautiful samples.
When conservatives can use "religious nutjob" as a way to distance themselves from their fringe off-the-deep-end idiots, so can liberals use SJWs to do the same.
There's sane people and insane people on both sides of the spectrum. Not embracing everyone "on my side" as my ally is the first step to getting to a way you can cooperate with the other side. You'll notice that they, too, have their loonies and once you separate them from the sane ones, you can find a common ground to work on.
Purely out of curiosity and absolutely unrelated, where do you live, and do you have weapons?
Sure, but what direction? f2m or m2f?
Now look, she accomplished her goal! Finally someone's reading her messages.
So what? It was none of those things.
It was not national. Hitler claimed to wanted to get the "German lands and blood home to the Reich", then let Italy have Southern Tyrol (mostly inhabited by people of German descent) so Mussolini held still when he cashed in Austria. He accepted splitting Poland with Russia, knowing well that in the areas around East Prussia a lot of Germans were deported after those parts of Poland fell to Russia. He didn't give a shit about this or that "German" territory as long as it furthered his plans.
He was not a socialist. That part of the party name was there to sway the communists and socialists to accept it as "well, just as fine". He brought back the "Arbeitsbuch", which basically put any worker at his employer's mercy.
The whole shit was not German. Although that bit could still be seen as "mostly correct". Hitler himself was Austrian and as history will easily show, the activity was not limited to Germany. No matter what borders you want to use, even the Holy Roman Empire at its greatest expansion was hardly what he wanted to conquer.
It was not a workers party. It had most of its backing from industrial and financial leaders like Krupp and Thyssen who did foresee his plans for rearmament and were (rightfully) hoping for large orders. Of course if you take money from the industry, you can hardly be a worker's hearo.
And finally, it wasn't really a party. It was a one person dictatorship with cronies orbiting around him, hoping that being close to the Fuerer would further their career.
So he's now a tax cheat, too?
Lemme guess, your boss bought some snakeoil peddler's spin who wanted to sell you a lot of "courses" and "consulting"?
Most EU laws by default contain clauses and provisions for commensurability. Which basically means that what you have to do is proportional to what you want to do. The privacy concerns and security required to store a few mail addresses of people who explicitly handed you their mail address so you can contact them is trivial.
It's a considerably different matter when you store everything about people and all their friends and connections.
Judges in Europe have a LOT of leeway when it comes to interpreting the law. And they generally do it with some sanity.
Would be interesting to try. Tell them to delete everything they have from you without disclosing what is "you", then sue when they don't find all your phone numbers and mail addresses.
Try that as your defense.
"Your honor, I did comply with many parts of the law. I did not kill, maim, threaten or cause other bodily harm to the absent couple when I broke into their home".
It's simple hubris. I got away with it in the past, why worry about it in the future?
Why do you ask Facebook if they would apply the privacy laws used against them in areas where they don't have to? That's like asking a criminal if he's not going to rob a home in areas where robbery is legal.
And they couldn't find any good caricaturists among themselves so they blew shit up. Makes sense.
Even if fed correct data the outcome can be considered "biased" if it dares to come to the conclusion that you should not deal with $minority.
Remember, we redefined words. "Biased" no longer means "unreasonable opinion about a group". We struck the "unreasonable" from that definition.