TFA said that the guard didn't know what the internet was. i'm pretty sure that that could extend to email as well.
i'm not saying it wasn't clever, but i feel like if i am captured by the taliban and have internet access for a small window of time, i'm going to send an email to someone like my parents or a close friend.
You missed the first part of my post, where I said I understand the right to privacy. Obviously you've taken it to the extreme, active privacy invasion vs passive privacy invasion, which is pretty much what I would expect from a flamebaiter. Google does not peer in your windows or tap your phones. They house data that you WILLINGLY give them. What do I mean? You use their free email service (gmail), their free browser (chrome), their free search engine (well, google), and any other of the myriad of products they offer to you FOR FREE. of course they're going to keep user data. so does yahoo, microsoft, or any other free service that you use. don't like it? stay in your locked house with all the windows covered and your huge fence and off the internet, because every little thing you do is tracked somehow somewhere. it doesn't mean the cyburrpoleece are listening in right now waiting to nab you if you say something wrong in an email. but if you think that, yeah you don't belong on the internet.
Sure I understand that you have a right to privacy, but if you aren't doing anything wrong, why do you care? I don't care that Google scans the content of my email to provide me with relevant ads. I never look at them or click on them. I'm not doing anything I shouldn't be doing online, so if Google knows that I go to a certain website (say, slashdot) more than others and makes it pop up when I type the letter "s" in the address bar, that's awesome for me.
I seriously think people are blowing this out of proportion.
I mean from a technical standpoint, what's the difference between how this works vs how current HDDs work? I thought that currently data is already stored magnetically...
here's what I posted:
This is the worst argument against net neutrality, ever. You're comparing the internet to newspapers and airlines. Let's think about this for a second.
Newspapers are read-only media that do nothing but provide information. No business-critical services are built around a newspaper, except for the publisher of said newspaper. If my newspaper could, say, allow people to purchase my product through it directly or allow people to interact with my ad, then maybe they could be comparable. This is a bad metaphor.
Next you compare the internet to airlines, which is laughable. Comparing first-class service on an airline to maybe that of a train is comparable, but not the internet. Sure, paying for faster service is tenable, but for BETTER service, or simply access? If I don't want better service on a plane, I will still end up at my destination. However, without net neutrality, UNLESS I pay for better service, I can't necessarily get to my destination.
Unless you have something better than these examples for metaphors, I suggest you rethink your arguments.
Why on earth would you do this? This seems like a disaster waiting to happen...
Why not just put the servers in the sewer or dangle them from blimps? Put them in orbit? How about in Pakistani caves? Submarines? On the backs of sharks? Whalesharks?
So if you use the wrong tool for the job and it doesn't work wouldn't you call that failing?
No. Failing would be if the tool didn't work. Using it for the incorrect application does not mean the tool has failed, it means the user has failed to correctly use the tool.
Slashdot Mirror
Self-aware + self-healing = End of human civilization
TFA said that the guard didn't know what the internet was. i'm pretty sure that that could extend to email as well. i'm not saying it wasn't clever, but i feel like if i am captured by the taliban and have internet access for a small window of time, i'm going to send an email to someone like my parents or a close friend.
Twitter, instead of, you know, email. Because it's more likely to be real.
You missed the first part of my post, where I said I understand the right to privacy. Obviously you've taken it to the extreme, active privacy invasion vs passive privacy invasion, which is pretty much what I would expect from a flamebaiter. Google does not peer in your windows or tap your phones. They house data that you WILLINGLY give them. What do I mean? You use their free email service (gmail), their free browser (chrome), their free search engine (well, google), and any other of the myriad of products they offer to you FOR FREE. of course they're going to keep user data. so does yahoo, microsoft, or any other free service that you use. don't like it? stay in your locked house with all the windows covered and your huge fence and off the internet, because every little thing you do is tracked somehow somewhere. it doesn't mean the cyburrpoleece are listening in right now waiting to nab you if you say something wrong in an email. but if you think that, yeah you don't belong on the internet.
Sure I understand that you have a right to privacy, but if you aren't doing anything wrong, why do you care? I don't care that Google scans the content of my email to provide me with relevant ads. I never look at them or click on them. I'm not doing anything I shouldn't be doing online, so if Google knows that I go to a certain website (say, slashdot) more than others and makes it pop up when I type the letter "s" in the address bar, that's awesome for me. I seriously think people are blowing this out of proportion.
Outbreak rentals just dropped to zero
obligatory: http://i.bnet.com/blogs/its_a_trap.jpg
This is why we have science. Good stuff all around, assuming it doesn't get corrupted.
I mean from a technical standpoint, what's the difference between how this works vs how current HDDs work? I thought that currently data is already stored magnetically...
So how is this any different than existing HDDs?
...getting drunk and saving the world could become synonymous?
...would like to know how they knew who my costumer was!
here's what I posted: This is the worst argument against net neutrality, ever. You're comparing the internet to newspapers and airlines. Let's think about this for a second. Newspapers are read-only media that do nothing but provide information. No business-critical services are built around a newspaper, except for the publisher of said newspaper. If my newspaper could, say, allow people to purchase my product through it directly or allow people to interact with my ad, then maybe they could be comparable. This is a bad metaphor. Next you compare the internet to airlines, which is laughable. Comparing first-class service on an airline to maybe that of a train is comparable, but not the internet. Sure, paying for faster service is tenable, but for BETTER service, or simply access? If I don't want better service on a plane, I will still end up at my destination. However, without net neutrality, UNLESS I pay for better service, I can't necessarily get to my destination. Unless you have something better than these examples for metaphors, I suggest you rethink your arguments.
Did they only test one person because they kept forgetting they'd tested him?
Why on earth would you do this? This seems like a disaster waiting to happen... Why not just put the servers in the sewer or dangle them from blimps? Put them in orbit? How about in Pakistani caves? Submarines? On the backs of sharks? Whalesharks?
iOS is the biggest mobile operating system player right now
Yep, it sure is. I mean, if you don't count Android
So if you use the wrong tool for the job and it doesn't work wouldn't you call that failing?
No. Failing would be if the tool didn't work. Using it for the incorrect application does not mean the tool has failed, it means the user has failed to correctly use the tool.
It's just a matter of time. Anyone seen Swordfish?
Am I the only one who read "Usenix security conference" as "Unisex security conference" ?
The worst thing that could possibly happen for any form of life anywhere would be its discovery by us.
You can come up with whatever perventage you want from those charts as some things (Video) might be deal breakers compared to others (MathML).
i avoid high schools to keep my perventage low.
no, i'm afraid that apple hatred and disgust is always going to be relevant.
by "afraid" i mean "overjoyed"
or the poo-trix
You mean someone knows when I put my browser in Porn Mode?
Once they figure out how to steer the car by thought, I'm going to be at Taco Bell a lot.