Making it unmeasureable because the victims don't dare report it does not make it go away. In fact, it makes is easier to commit the crime, by far.
Is that your goal? To make it easier to get away with that sort of criminal act? Do you have some personal interest in making it easier and safer to be a criminal? Do you have some vested personal interest in keeping the authorities from knowing about such crimes?
You are an idiot, and precisely the sort of subhuman psychopath who runs that kind of criminal enterprise. You belong in a cage, like an animal, forever.
You are an idiot. And a psychopath, who should be put into a cage, and left there. Forever. Subhuman animals like you are precisely the sort who run that kind of criminal enterprise.
Except the criticism of people by the_donald isn't in the spirit of fun.
Which is exactly what I said, yes. Glad you agree.
They (and Trump's NSC pick Flynn) spread outright lies that have incited violence (the man in the pizza shop).
I don't condone what he did, but I can understand his frustration. It's still pretty bad that he has unauditable access to backend servers.
So if one side is a bunch of malicious assholes, it's OK for the other side to be, too? That kind of thinking - from both sides - is precisely why Trump won. Not because he's better, but because he's different than the two parties you can't tell apart without a score card.
Er, no, dude, it wasn't in the spirit of fun. If it were, you would have seen the criticism of you as being in the spirit of fun. But that criticism was malice, and your response was malicious. It was in the spiriting of being an asshole.
I recall watching a documentary on this very subject once. They have a series of professional sound engineers listen to the same recording in both digital (but done right, without any compression or any of the other idiocy) and analog (as in, recorded analog, not digital then converted), and the professional sound engineers couldn't tell the difference.
The tables and cartridges audiophiles uses eliminate almost all of that and yes they cost a fortune.
Given how close the amounts are, and that vinyl costs quite a bit more per album, it's pretty clear this is still far fewer purchases. In fact, given that vinyl is more a fad (with half of them never being played), this could easily be accounted for by the same number of sales at twice the price each.
In other words, this isn't particularly meaningful data, except that audiophiles haven't gotten any less gullible in the last year.
Predicted that Trumps real position on climate change was actually "I don't know because I haven't looked into it," and that once he did, if he decided it was a problem, he'd be the only person who could convince the Republican base that it was a problem and that something needed to be done. That no Democrat ever could, but Trump could carry the Republicans right along because they see him as one of them, and very credible.
I'm an Apple user; if they pulled this crap with my Apple ID it would be extremely irritating; you can have a lot of money wrapped up in these accounts in the form of purchases!
With Apple, you're the customer. With Google, you're the product, and they really don't care, because eyeballs are fungible.
My electricity provider and my dentist even wanted my SSN!A
No problem, as soon as you sign this, which indemnifies me without limit for any misuse if this identify theft qualify information. In other words, if someone breaks into your computer and steal this, you pay all costs related to straightening it out, including, but not limited to, costs of credit score monitoring, all actual costs due to fraud, any increased interest I might have to pay on loans as a result of damage to my credit score, legal fees, lost wages, etc.
What's that? You're not willing to accept responsibility for this information that you require but have absolutely no use for? Then I guess we won't be doing business.
the manufacturers would have to provide, in some form, what their devices are supposed to be able to connect to, so that the firewall can block it from connecting to everything else.
In other words, manufacturers would have to admit how extensively their devices spy on you, and phone home with it, and open themselves up to easy consumer monitoring of what their devices send back.
This is the same as it's always been with the mainstream press. The only difference between the New York Times and Facebook is that the barriers to entry have been lowered, and now everybody can play.
"The goal of eliminating any appearance of political bias" is not the same as "eliminating political bias." In short, their goal is to improve their skills at generating propaganda, so they don't get caught as much.
This is your opportunity to make good on one of your campaign promises, to curb China's abusive trade policies. Your response should be an immediate announcement of a trade war with China, as deliberate provocation. Yeah, we'll have to pay a bit more for phones that do everything but make phone calls, sure, and we'll lose access to their restrictive and heavily manipulated market, but their economy will go from being a house of cards to a smoking crater, and they'll never fuck with you again.
Plus, by doing this immediately, Obama gets the blame, as it happens on his shift, and the worse of the fallout will be settling by January 20, and you can take credit for the make up. Win/win.
No, the correct response is to use a mailing list, and if you are concerned with interns sending 1.2 million people cat pictures, restrict who can use it. This has been the correct way to handle this for at about 20 years. There is never any excuse for allowing a message to be sent to 1.2 million discrete addresses. Ever.
No, the correct response is to a) correctly configure the mail server to reject any message addressed to more than a reasonable number of people, say, 100 (or even less), and b) use mailing lists for mass messages, like people with a normal IQ.
Whoever runs their mail server should be driven out of the profession and put in a home for the mentally impaired.
They have 1.2 million users. That's big enough to have an "email server admin." In fact, it's big enough to have two. They should get some. Not having any hasn't worked out too well for them.
That's not discriminating against young people, that's discriminating against people who can't act for shit. There are just as many old people who can't act who don't get move roles, either.
The only way to quasi-enforce anti-age-discrimination laws is to force studios to green light scripts with older lead characters.
Such scripts are being greenlighted more these days. Helen Mirren has no problem getting work.
It is not age discrimination to pass over a 28-year-old, in favor of a 21-year-old, for the part of a 17-year-old.
Outside of big budget studio productions, in general, movies with female leads that are not pretending to be teenagers or in their 20s do not do as well at the box office. Especially the popcorn movies for the younger crowds, who just want wank material to begin with. The only way to even reduce age discrimination in Hollywood is to convince audiences to see movies starring older actresses.
You underestimate the talent of a make-up artist. I've live in California for a long, long time, but what really drove it home for me was when John McCain was running for president and his wife was on the tonight show. She was, at that time, in her 50s, an aging beauty queen who had take good care of herself, and that's exactly what she looked like Very attractive, but clearly in her 50s. Look at a press release photo of her (with Hollywood makeup), and it's clear that if she were an actress, she could easily play a teenager. Valerie Bertinelli, made up for the cameras, looks exactly the same today (at age 55) as she did at 18, other than her butt being a little bigger (and that's the fashion these days, and purely a choice). I'm not kidding when I say they could make a 90 year old grandmother look like a teenager. Plastic surgery is only useful off camera.
Yeah, and setting that option on an iPhone required going two or three menus deep, and when I checked the menus didn't have very helpful names.
It's less inconvenience than trying to get charges reversed after Precious Snowflake spends all your money on some game. There's this thing that humans can do, called "foresight" or "planning." Try it sometime. You can look up instructions on Google.
So, I should assume that, if I can find a crack through your security, you're OK with me draining your bank account?
That would be a meaningful comparison if we were talking about your kid stealing your phone without your permission, and you filed criminal charges against him for doing so.
Slashdot Mirror
Making it unmeasureable because the victims don't dare report it does not make it go away. In fact, it makes is easier to commit the crime, by far.
Is that your goal? To make it easier to get away with that sort of criminal act? Do you have some personal interest in making it easier and safer to be a criminal? Do you have some vested personal interest in keeping the authorities from knowing about such crimes?
You are an idiot, and precisely the sort of subhuman psychopath who runs that kind of criminal enterprise. You belong in a cage, like an animal, forever.
You are an idiot. And a psychopath, who should be put into a cage, and left there. Forever. Subhuman animals like you are precisely the sort who run that kind of criminal enterprise.
Paying ransom should be a felony.
You want to put people in prison for being the victim of a serious crime? Sounds a little harsh.
And stupid.
Except the criticism of people by the_donald isn't in the spirit of fun.
Which is exactly what I said, yes. Glad you agree.
They (and Trump's NSC pick Flynn) spread outright lies that have incited violence (the man in the pizza shop).
I don't condone what he did, but I can understand his frustration. It's still pretty bad that he has unauditable access to backend servers.
So if one side is a bunch of malicious assholes, it's OK for the other side to be, too? That kind of thinking - from both sides - is precisely why Trump won. Not because he's better, but because he's different than the two parties you can't tell apart without a score card.
Er, no, dude, it wasn't in the spirit of fun. If it were, you would have seen the criticism of you as being in the spirit of fun. But that criticism was malice, and your response was malicious. It was in the spiriting of being an asshole.
Apology rejected.
Indeed. It can bring the sound quality up to where it's equal to a properly recorded digital recording.
I recall watching a documentary on this very subject once. They have a series of professional sound engineers listen to the same recording in both digital (but done right, without any compression or any of the other idiocy) and analog (as in, recorded analog, not digital then converted), and the professional sound engineers couldn't tell the difference.
The tables and cartridges audiophiles uses eliminate almost all of that and yes they cost a fortune.
So do the Monster cables that cost thousands of dollars, that audiophiles can't tell apart from wire coat hanger.
Audiophiles, like wine aficionados, experience what they expect. And nobody expects expensive stuff to sound the same as cheap stuff.
Given how close the amounts are, and that vinyl costs quite a bit more per album, it's pretty clear this is still far fewer purchases. In fact, given that vinyl is more a fad (with half of them never being played), this could easily be accounted for by the same number of sales at twice the price each.
In other words, this isn't particularly meaningful data, except that audiophiles haven't gotten any less gullible in the last year.
Scott Adams predicted this in May.
Predicted that Trumps real position on climate change was actually "I don't know because I haven't looked into it," and that once he did, if he decided it was a problem, he'd be the only person who could convince the Republican base that it was a problem and that something needed to be done. That no Democrat ever could, but Trump could carry the Republicans right along because they see him as one of them, and very credible.
Mr. Adams is a very observant wingnut.
I'm an Apple user; if they pulled this crap with my Apple ID it would be extremely irritating; you can have a lot of money wrapped up in these accounts in the form of purchases!
With Apple, you're the customer. With Google, you're the product, and they really don't care, because eyeballs are fungible.
One of the very few things Apple gets right.
My electricity provider and my dentist even wanted my SSN!A
No problem, as soon as you sign this, which indemnifies me without limit for any misuse if this identify theft qualify information. In other words, if someone breaks into your computer and steal this, you pay all costs related to straightening it out, including, but not limited to, costs of credit score monitoring, all actual costs due to fraud, any increased interest I might have to pay on loans as a result of damage to my credit score, legal fees, lost wages, etc.
What's that? You're not willing to accept responsibility for this information that you require but have absolutely no use for? Then I guess we won't be doing business.
the manufacturers would have to provide, in some form, what their devices are supposed to be able to connect to, so that the firewall can block it from connecting to everything else.
In other words, manufacturers would have to admit how extensively their devices spy on you, and phone home with it, and open themselves up to easy consumer monitoring of what their devices send back.
I'm not holding my breath.
This is the same as it's always been with the mainstream press. The only difference between the New York Times and Facebook is that the barriers to entry have been lowered, and now everybody can play.
Which still has nothing to with Twitter's terms of service.
The legal restriction is that the CIA cannot perform law enforcement functions inside the United States.
This has nothing whatsoever to do with Twitter's terms of service.
"The goal of eliminating any appearance of political bias" is not the same as "eliminating political bias." In short, their goal is to improve their skills at generating propaganda, so they don't get caught as much.
This is your opportunity to make good on one of your campaign promises, to curb China's abusive trade policies. Your response should be an immediate announcement of a trade war with China, as deliberate provocation. Yeah, we'll have to pay a bit more for phones that do everything but make phone calls, sure, and we'll lose access to their restrictive and heavily manipulated market, but their economy will go from being a house of cards to a smoking crater, and they'll never fuck with you again.
Plus, by doing this immediately, Obama gets the blame, as it happens on his shift, and the worse of the fallout will be settling by January 20, and you can take credit for the make up. Win/win.
No, the correct response is to use a mailing list, and if you are concerned with interns sending 1.2 million people cat pictures, restrict who can use it. This has been the correct way to handle this for at about 20 years. There is never any excuse for allowing a message to be sent to 1.2 million discrete addresses. Ever.
No, the correct response is to a) correctly configure the mail server to reject any message addressed to more than a reasonable number of people, say, 100 (or even less), and b) use mailing lists for mass messages, like people with a normal IQ.
Whoever runs their mail server should be driven out of the profession and put in a home for the mentally impaired.
They have 1.2 million users. That's big enough to have an "email server admin." In fact, it's big enough to have two. They should get some. Not having any hasn't worked out too well for them.
That's not discriminating against young people, that's discriminating against people who can't act for shit. There are just as many old people who can't act who don't get move roles, either.
The only way to quasi-enforce anti-age-discrimination laws is to force studios to green light scripts with older lead characters.
Such scripts are being greenlighted more these days. Helen Mirren has no problem getting work.
It is not age discrimination to pass over a 28-year-old, in favor of a 21-year-old, for the part of a 17-year-old.
Outside of big budget studio productions, in general, movies with female leads that are not pretending to be teenagers or in their 20s do not do as well at the box office. Especially the popcorn movies for the younger crowds, who just want wank material to begin with. The only way to even reduce age discrimination in Hollywood is to convince audiences to see movies starring older actresses.
You underestimate the talent of a make-up artist. I've live in California for a long, long time, but what really drove it home for me was when John McCain was running for president and his wife was on the tonight show. She was, at that time, in her 50s, an aging beauty queen who had take good care of herself, and that's exactly what she looked like Very attractive, but clearly in her 50s. Look at a press release photo of her (with Hollywood makeup), and it's clear that if she were an actress, she could easily play a teenager. Valerie Bertinelli, made up for the cameras, looks exactly the same today (at age 55) as she did at 18, other than her butt being a little bigger (and that's the fashion these days, and purely a choice). I'm not kidding when I say they could make a 90 year old grandmother look like a teenager. Plastic surgery is only useful off camera.
Yeah, and setting that option on an iPhone required going two or three menus deep, and when I checked the menus didn't have very helpful names.
It's less inconvenience than trying to get charges reversed after Precious Snowflake spends all your money on some game. There's this thing that humans can do, called "foresight" or "planning." Try it sometime. You can look up instructions on Google.
So, I should assume that, if I can find a crack through your security, you're OK with me draining your bank account?
That would be a meaningful comparison if we were talking about your kid stealing your phone without your permission, and you filed criminal charges against him for doing so.