Isn't it about time for Google to put an end to GMail? Every other service of theirs I've tried to use got abandoned. I keep wondering how much longer they'll have search.
Who needs completely self driving cars when you can just have a robot back seat driver telling you what to do? "Turn left. Avoid pedestrian on right. Stop at stop sign. Slow down. I'm telling the cops about what you just did." Much more cost-effective.
If this had been a federal rap, he'd do almost all of the ten years, but being California, it'll end up being a fraction of that, especially since it's a "non-violent" crime.
Think about it. If you were the FBI would you announce your best investigative techniques to the world? These are likely obsolete methods or even ones that they've considered but never used because they have better ones.
I like the idea of putting TSA screeners on the plane. In fact, make the ones who screen the passengers for a flight take the flight with them. Like having to jump the parachute you pack.
Body cams won't solve all of these issues, but at least they make it more difficult for cops to just invent things. Video can also exonerate officers unjustly charged with brutality or other violations of rights, so it's not a one-way street. The trick is to implement body cams with policies that are enforced, such as always turning them on during interactions with the public, making it impossible for them to be erased by the officers wearing them, etc.
I've noticed that whatever the spy agencies like the CIA and NSA come up with, it appears to be Write Only information. Nobody else in government seems to be able to get any of their work product. For example, presumably they collected Hillary's emails, just like they have everyone else's, yet when she claimed to have destroyed all the "personal" ones, nobody said, "Hey, let's see if the NSA has them".
The Powerlineblog guys have been running a series of posts about the state of Minnesota getting scammed on reimbursements for phony child care services and cash getting shipped out in bags back to the home countries of the immigrants who are bilking the system. They say it's gotten so bad that people are buying "shares" of fake child care providers in order to participate in the looting, and Minnesota Bureau of Investigation is busily investigating and indicting people.
The government has infinite resources to deploy when it decides you have to get 'got'. I've long thought that we need a new form of Miranda in which if you're involved in a civil or criminal matter vs the government and you prevail, you get all your legal fees reimbursed, aka "loser pays". That's the only chance there is of leveling the playing field.
Based on what I've seen in recent years, a "racist" or "biased" output will be deemed to be any that results in a protected group being disproportionately represented, either too highly or too little depending on which outcome hurts it. No matter that, for example, a higher-than-normal rejection rate for loans for a group doesn't result in a lower-than-normal default rate on those loans (meaning the rejection were reasonable, not biased), it will be, definitionally, evidence of discrimination.
I've got email going back 20 years, a ton of different email accounts, numerous scripts and automation, and damned if I'm going to move all that to another client unless I have to.
I remember when answering machines were first coming out (yes, I"m THAT old). People wigged the hell out about having to "talk to a machine". Now is there anyone anywhere who cares? No.
Seems to me the most non-degradable thing that would be clearly "man" made would be ceramic sinks and toilets. Assuming that, given alien anatomy and culture, they'd even use such things.
Net neutrality was a fix in search of a non-existent problem, and eliminating it won't magically make that problem poof into existence. When (IF) the problem actually arrives, then is the time to go after it legislatively. "Correcting" things ex ante is just stupid.
As for this article, it's clearly setting up to explain away what will soon to be obvious: the end of net neutrality doesn't bring about the apocalypse that the more sweaty purveyors of doom were predicting.
and accountability to users and all the other things Facebook is screwing up. Or more accurately anger that trump supposedly benefited finally got people to care about all these things, when they couldn't have given a rat's arse that their electronic lives were being bought and sold six ways from sunday just a few months prior. You got to give him credit for this amazing awakening.
Just like special prosecutors were just peachy as long as they were going after Republicans, but when they started going after Democrats too, well, maybe we should rethink this...
Things seem great until they turn around and start biting YOU on the ass.
On the one hand, we should be skeptical of "research" funded by folks with a stake in the outcome. On the other, who else would do it? Would a study funded by an Atkins advocacy group that didn't find benefits to a low-carb diet ever see the light of day? No, it would quietly be shredded, burned, and buried. Like our adversarial court system, you need people who think that we've gotten it wrong to pony up to get the other viewpoint looked at. The real test is, are the results reproducible?
California & New York are more or less the last bastions of civilization in the USA. They're the one place that was more or less untouched by Tea Party style trickle down low or no regulation politics. This would suck for the entire United States (including rural California) except for the billionaire class.
The arguments for breaking up large corporations apply equally well to states. California has become such a behemoth that it can drive the regulatory apparatus of the entire country, and that's not how our system should work.
To avoid the problem of disqualified signatures torpedoing an initiative, knowledgeable signature gatherers know to verify every signature themselves, and they pay the people who collect the signatures only for ones that pass the verification process. Not only does it avoid the, "Get a signature even if you know the person doesn't qualify" mentality, it gets around the poison pill tactic that some opponents use, where they'll send out people to sign fraudulently (or even put ringers on the signature gathering campaign to do things like collect signatures that they throw away or are for the wrong county, etc.) just to make the proponents think they've achieved their goal and stop too early.
Verifying every signature adds to the cost, but it provides clarity on how the effort is really doing and avoids having it all go to waste when the gathering effort comes up short.
That there was another one. The issue is that a news organization needed to point it out, instead of Facebook discovering this through the analysis of their access patterns from these firms. After they realized that one was doing this, they should have been analyzing to find others immediately.
How do you know they weren't already aware and just keeping it under wraps until CNBC forced their hand? It's pretty clear that FB, facing withering criticism, regulation, and potential legislative action, isn't motivated to be open about what it knows or does.
for the various pressure groups to descend if this ever takes place. In an era when cities are divesting themselves of Confederate statuary, pension funds receive demands to disinvest in hated sectors like tobacco or gun manufacturers, and the wrong tweet can get you fired, how long do you think it'll be before public ISPs are being lobbied to block websites like "hate" sites, porn sites, or anti-vax sites? And do it in many cases, because those ISPs will be run as spinelessly as university administrations.
Do tariffs ever work long term? It's basically a tax, which is funny because Republicans are supposed to be anti-tax, pro free-market. Both of which a tariff is not.
For Trump, "Republican" is a flag of convenience, not a true indication of his political philosophy.
Slashdot Mirror
Isn't it about time for Google to put an end to GMail? Every other service of theirs I've tried to use got abandoned. I keep wondering how much longer they'll have search.
Who needs completely self driving cars when you can just have a robot back seat driver telling you what to do? "Turn left. Avoid pedestrian on right. Stop at stop sign. Slow down. I'm telling the cops about what you just did." Much more cost-effective.
If this had been a federal rap, he'd do almost all of the ten years, but being California, it'll end up being a fraction of that, especially since it's a "non-violent" crime.
Google has failed me. Plenty of references, but no definitions in the first pages.
Think about it. If you were the FBI would you announce your best investigative techniques to the world? These are likely obsolete methods or even ones that they've considered but never used because they have better ones.
I like the idea of putting TSA screeners on the plane. In fact, make the ones who screen the passengers for a flight take the flight with them. Like having to jump the parachute you pack.
Body cams won't solve all of these issues, but at least they make it more difficult for cops to just invent things. Video can also exonerate officers unjustly charged with brutality or other violations of rights, so it's not a one-way street. The trick is to implement body cams with policies that are enforced, such as always turning them on during interactions with the public, making it impossible for them to be erased by the officers wearing them, etc.
I've noticed that whatever the spy agencies like the CIA and NSA come up with, it appears to be Write Only information. Nobody else in government seems to be able to get any of their work product. For example, presumably they collected Hillary's emails, just like they have everyone else's, yet when she claimed to have destroyed all the "personal" ones, nobody said, "Hey, let's see if the NSA has them".
The part that struck me as ludicrous was the "secret plans to develop a supersonic anti-ship missile for use on U.S. submarines by 2020".
You can't get a new stove approved for submarine use in two years, much less develop and certify a new missile....
If there was 617 GB of data sitting there to be pilfered, they must have been working on it a good while.
FTFA: The data stolen was of a highly sensitive nature despite being housed on the contractor’s unclassified network.
You've got to assume that anything on a system that's attached to the internet is going to be compromised sooner or later.
Before you give credit to Trump, this is the tail of the economy that Obama revived. See Bare Stearns.
Yep. All it took was an 8-year-long runway and now we're airborne!
The Powerlineblog guys have been running a series of posts about the state of Minnesota getting scammed on reimbursements for phony child care services and cash getting shipped out in bags back to the home countries of the immigrants who are bilking the system. They say it's gotten so bad that people are buying "shares" of fake child care providers in order to participate in the looting, and Minnesota Bureau of Investigation is busily investigating and indicting people.
The government has infinite resources to deploy when it decides you have to get 'got'. I've long thought that we need a new form of Miranda in which if you're involved in a civil or criminal matter vs the government and you prevail, you get all your legal fees reimbursed, aka "loser pays". That's the only chance there is of leveling the playing field.
Based on what I've seen in recent years, a "racist" or "biased" output will be deemed to be any that results in a protected group being disproportionately represented, either too highly or too little depending on which outcome hurts it. No matter that, for example, a higher-than-normal rejection rate for loans for a group doesn't result in a lower-than-normal default rate on those loans (meaning the rejection were reasonable, not biased), it will be, definitionally, evidence of discrimination.
I've got email going back 20 years, a ton of different email accounts, numerous scripts and automation, and damned if I'm going to move all that to another client unless I have to.
I remember when answering machines were first coming out (yes, I"m THAT old). People wigged the hell out about having to "talk to a machine". Now is there anyone anywhere who cares? No.
Seems to me the most non-degradable thing that would be clearly "man" made would be ceramic sinks and toilets. Assuming that, given alien anatomy and culture, they'd even use such things.
Net neutrality was a fix in search of a non-existent problem, and eliminating it won't magically make that problem poof into existence. When (IF) the problem actually arrives, then is the time to go after it legislatively. "Correcting" things ex ante is just stupid. As for this article, it's clearly setting up to explain away what will soon to be obvious: the end of net neutrality doesn't bring about the apocalypse that the more sweaty purveyors of doom were predicting.
and accountability to users and all the other things Facebook is screwing up. Or more accurately anger that trump supposedly benefited finally got people to care about all these things, when they couldn't have given a rat's arse that their electronic lives were being bought and sold six ways from sunday just a few months prior. You got to give him credit for this amazing awakening.
Just like special prosecutors were just peachy as long as they were going after Republicans, but when they started going after Democrats too, well, maybe we should rethink this ...
Things seem great until they turn around and start biting YOU on the ass.
On the one hand, we should be skeptical of "research" funded by folks with a stake in the outcome. On the other, who else would do it? Would a study funded by an Atkins advocacy group that didn't find benefits to a low-carb diet ever see the light of day? No, it would quietly be shredded, burned, and buried. Like our adversarial court system, you need people who think that we've gotten it wrong to pony up to get the other viewpoint looked at. The real test is, are the results reproducible?
California & New York are more or less the last bastions of civilization in the USA. They're the one place that was more or less untouched by Tea Party style trickle down low or no regulation politics. This would suck for the entire United States (including rural California) except for the billionaire class.
The arguments for breaking up large corporations apply equally well to states. California has become such a behemoth that it can drive the regulatory apparatus of the entire country, and that's not how our system should work.
To avoid the problem of disqualified signatures torpedoing an initiative, knowledgeable signature gatherers know to verify every signature themselves, and they pay the people who collect the signatures only for ones that pass the verification process. Not only does it avoid the, "Get a signature even if you know the person doesn't qualify" mentality, it gets around the poison pill tactic that some opponents use, where they'll send out people to sign fraudulently (or even put ringers on the signature gathering campaign to do things like collect signatures that they throw away or are for the wrong county, etc.) just to make the proponents think they've achieved their goal and stop too early. Verifying every signature adds to the cost, but it provides clarity on how the effort is really doing and avoids having it all go to waste when the gathering effort comes up short.
That there was another one. The issue is that a news organization needed to point it out, instead of Facebook discovering this through the analysis of their access patterns from these firms. After they realized that one was doing this, they should have been analyzing to find others immediately.
How do you know they weren't already aware and just keeping it under wraps until CNBC forced their hand? It's pretty clear that FB, facing withering criticism, regulation, and potential legislative action, isn't motivated to be open about what it knows or does.
for the various pressure groups to descend if this ever takes place. In an era when cities are divesting themselves of Confederate statuary, pension funds receive demands to disinvest in hated sectors like tobacco or gun manufacturers, and the wrong tweet can get you fired, how long do you think it'll be before public ISPs are being lobbied to block websites like "hate" sites, porn sites, or anti-vax sites? And do it in many cases, because those ISPs will be run as spinelessly as university administrations.
Can’t be sad about this one.
Do tariffs ever work long term? It's basically a tax, which is funny because Republicans are supposed to be anti-tax, pro free-market. Both of which a tariff is not.
For Trump, "Republican" is a flag of convenience, not a true indication of his political philosophy.