Wouldn't have to. When you are in a car and you press "set" on the indicator stock, you are operating the vehicle and delegating a part of that operation to the car. This is a natural extension of that. Uber engineers have DLs and know the rules of the road. You don't license the car or the equipment, you license the operator and they delegate.
I'd be extremely surprised if there were no laws defining what a street legal car is and rules for safety critical systems and what is and is not delegated. If we go back to before ABS was ubiquitous, it was my responsibility to pump-brake so I could steer and brake at the same time. If I floor it now in a car with ABS, I'd say it's the car's responsibility. The liability would be a civil matter and a matter between me and the car company, but when did the criminal responsibility with regards to negligence and reckless driving pass? That's between me and the law. I assume it passed in some form of approval process.
I expect that whatever system Uber has installed is experimental and not approved and thus illegal. If it was purely informational and advisory like say GPS navigation or a rear view camera it would be okay, but once you have a system that can actually interfere in the driving I can't imagine that it's free reign. You can't road test your new brake system just because you want to and will pay the bills.
We want to make a PR stunt to show that regulation is killing innovation in the industry and that we're the hip and cool future while our legal team thinks we'll be able to backpedal in time to avoid major economic penalties.
Would not want to be on that drill crew. Falling into lava or getting splashed with lava is just about the worst way I can imagine to die.
I'd think falling into 1000C melted rock would make you pass out pretty much instantly, anything that kills me in under a minute would at least be over pretty quick. The worst kinds of dying seem to be where your body or mind is slowly falling apart with increasing pain and incapacitation while taking a really long time to actually kill you. That some of them long for a quick death to the point of wanting assisted suicide says a lot. What's worse than losing your life is having a life not worth living.
If there is the fear that corrupt or tyrannical authorities would confiscate them, that's a risk they run every moment. Such an authority would probably already have control over all ISPs in that country, making it impossible to do a mobile cloud back-up. Best solution would be copy the stuff to the laptop and encrypt it there, rather than make 3 camera companies make something that adds hundreds of $$$ to the price of a camera
What it'll cost in design and they'll charge for it is another matter, but SD card speed hardware encryption is achieved in a few thousand logic gates and single digit milliwatts of power and the rest is basically software management. On the hardware bill of materials I'm thinking $5 tops. Whether they want to is less certain, it also sounds like a function many people trying to take creepy shots would use and cause bad PR.
I'm sorry, but this is bullcrap. The greatest number of deaths through war have come from non-religious origins. Taking religion out of man has lead to the deaths of ten of millions if not hundreds of millions of people. Religion couldn't touch that scale if they wanted to. 31 Million people have died because of religion in recorded history. Stalin killed 50 Million people in his life.
Meh, only because we haven't done any major religious wars in recent history they've been quite significant for their time. The day India/Pakistan, Israel/Middle East or indigenous/migrant Europe goes up in flames it'll easily be a WWII-class war.
Since when is no estimates a subsitute for poor estimates? It's done when it's done, we'll get there when we get there, it'll run out of power when it runs out. Let's not try to find any answers because they'll be based on assumptions and have uncertainty and won't be perfect.
I agree that sometimes the estimates are as good as they get and the only way to know more is to actually try, but if you do say a 30 minute average and tell people it's an average of the last 30 minutes that's a reasonably good indication. Don't let perfect be the enemy of good.
They saw that the future was laptops and more powerful CPU+IGP solutions than Intel could offer. But I don't think they truly understood how much marrying themselves to ATI would allow Intel to make a move on nVidia and the graphics market. Intel took the opportunity to kill off third party chipsets giving them in practice full control over the motherboard and integrate their IGP into the CPU so every sale was a bundle. By having AMD open the door Intel could do it without any real anti-trust issues, I think they had to pay off nVidia a little but they got what they wanted.
If they'd not bought ATI then Intel could have had both ATI and nVidia turn against them as Intel tried to move in, with AMD having the pick of the crop. Or even if Intel had bought ATI as there was rumors then nVidia would become their natural ally for free. Look for example at the gaming market, we're buying quad-core chips with huge IGPs we don't need because we'll be using dGPU(s) anyway, but Intel has still made it better value than hex-cores with X99 motherboards. They can do that because there's no choice, Zen is targeting the gamer simply by using all the die space for the CPU. AMD has to start thinking about how the competition will act in response.
That might mean the project is approaching commercial feasibility, that they'd do research projects and concept cars by themselves is fine but I never believed Google would become a car manufacturer. You can't compare Chromebooks or Chromecast to the engineering complexity of a car, to start from the ground up like Tesla they'd need forever both in time and money. OTOH there's no reason to start partnering until you're really close to something so you have to mate the sensor grid with a particular car design. Let's get this show on the road:)
The premise for the suit is quite creative. And absurd. Its only chance is finding a sympathetic (read: nationalistic) jury. I guess it's worth a shot considering all the protectionist rhetoric that was thrown around during this election cycle.
I think it's mostly a ploy by the lawyers to get Disney to trip up by explaining that it's not racism just price dumping.
Clearly someone is making some serious $$$ by perpetuating this system. Who?
Mostly executives pushing the cost ahead of them. Hire cheaper staff, costs go down quick and product quality and reputation slower so short term you boost margins, raise the stock price, collect your quarterly bonus and leave as a great CEO. Hire more expensive staff, costs go up quick while product quality and reputation only slowly gets better, magins are down, stock price is down, no bonuses and everybody is unhappy with you. Usually you're shuffled out of office before your investments pay off. Nobody's come up with good incentives to punish those who flush the company's long term future down the drain. It's only the employees that go down with the sinking ship.
Not true. They sell their investments to other investors. That by itself has zero effect on your investment. But if this happens enough, it signals the market that these investments may not be as worthwhile, and new investors may offer lower prices as a result. Down goes your portfolio.
Except there are plenty oligarchs that don't have to consider the public opinion and will invest in whatever is legal and makes money. Look at the tobacco industry, arms industry, porn industry or any kind of business some may find morally questionable and a few "ethical" non-investors don't matter at all. If you sell out slowly you do nothing and if you dump it quick you're just offering arbitrage until the price is back where it should be. There's only two things that matter, whether the underlying business is affected too or whether you'll run out of even more shady characters to sell it to if you want out. The latter you can forget about, we're talking coal plants and ICE cars here not child labor sweatshops and illegal arms trade.
As for the market, I'd say most of it is lukewarm to being "green". It's not like running around with a fur coat or animal-tested cosmetics, most people manage quite fine to justify that they need a "gas guzzler" and until there's a decent alternative they're not bad people for having one. It's not hard to find some over the top eco-hippie to prove nothing will ever be enough, if you don't want to give it any effort at all. Making funds sell out of fossil fuel car companies does nothing if you can't convince people to stop buying fossil fuel cars. It's just mental masturbation to pretend you're doing something for the environment.
That could be, in part, because the link between salary and job satisfaction is very weak. According to a meta-analysis by University of Florida business school professor Timothy Judge and other researchers, there's less than a 2% overlap between the two factors.
Because we trade away one for the other in context, say you're a doctor. You could run a private clinic for fat cat clients and make big bucks. Or you could work for "Doctors Without Borders" doing humanitarian work for shitty pay and great job satisfaction. But you wouldn't go flip burgers at McDonald's for shitty pay and shitty job satisfaction. This could get very confusing for a statistician, because if you average it out the low wage earner seems pretty happy but really it's a mix of no choice and deliberate choice. That means we tend to get happier when we increase our potential, being eligible to get a $60k job and picking a $30k job will be completely different than when a $30k job is the most you can make. And if your priorities change you can probably find a $60k job later. Having attractive job skills is never a bad thing, even if you're not profit-maximizing.
Also the Surface Studio is looking like a real winner.
Winner or loser it seems like an extreme niche product. More like a symbolic jab at Apple about who is the artist's choice than anything that'll show up on the bottom line in a big way.
What Watson did is something any intern with time on his or her hands could have achieved by looking at the data, searching in a medical database, and then a long bit of drudgery finding the wheat among the chaff.
And perhaps the important part is that the wheat:chaff ratio is only getting worse as we get more and more knowledge about increasingly obscure conditions. Practically we can only ask doctors to learn this much before they have to start practicing medicine. Practically we don't have time for interns to chase needles in a haystack very often.
Sure, in theory you could boil it down to a theory of indicators and counter-indicators combined with tables on base incidence and prevalence, modifiers for age, sex and other risk factors, co-morbidity with known conditions etc. and then this would be almost pure math and probability. In practice it's usually not that easy to make the data that structured though, and then you need Watson to say that what researcher A said in this paper is the same as doctor B wrote in this journal.
I bet it blows your mind that the people they're fighting are also muslims.
Because...?
I was walking across a bridge one day, and I saw a man standing on the edge, about to jump. I ran over and said: "Stop. Don't do it."
"Why shouldn't I?" he asked.
"Well, there's so much to live for!"
"Like what?"
"Are you religious?"
He said: "Yes."
I said: "Me too. Are you Christian or Buddhist?"
"Christian."
"Me too. Are you Catholic or Protestant?"
"Protestant."
"Me too. Are you Episcopalian or Baptist?"
"Baptist."
"Wow. Me too. Are you Baptist Church of God or Baptist Church of the Lord?"
"Baptist Church of God."
"Me too. Are you original Baptist Church of God, or are you Reformed Baptist Church of God?"
"Reformed Baptist Church of God."
"Me too. Are you Reformed Baptist Church of God, Reformation of 1879, or Reformed Baptist Church of God, Reformation of 1915?"
He said: "Reformed Baptist Church of God, Reformation of 1915."
I said: "Die, heretic scum," and pushed him off.
Religious wackos can rant and rave about people who believe in false gods or worse no gods at all, but worst of all are those who believe in a "perverted" version of their own god and those who've abandoned the faith. Not sure what your point is though, I care about how many people want to kill me, how many other people they want to kill is of lesser concern.
If they actually tried, there are meta-scams that don't actually do anything they just pretend to hold your files hostage. It's like robbing someone with a replica gun, if the victim can't tell and you don't try to shoot anything it works just the same. The kind of victim they're looking for with lots of high-value data and no backups is probably just going to panic and pay anyway, since it's pretty much established that there is no "fix" for a crypto-locked machine.
Initially the robots are only just a bit cheaper than labour, so slow introduction and minimal price changes. But over time, they get better and cheaper, until anyone that still relies on labour will not be able to compete.
Most of the cost is software, once you have a working system the money is in volume. Right now it's going real slow but once you have say 1% self-driving cars on the road and they're starting to look at cash-positive margins you'll see a huge and quick ramp-up with entire fleets switching. Same thing with big chains with tens of thousands of outlets, either it's just a subsidized experiment/R&D/trial project or it'll be massive. It's just in the nature of working on a common system, it either works for almost nobody or almost everybody. That in between period will pass awfully quick compared to a human's career expectations.
Institutional unemployment is best paid for institutionally (free education) or else the problems will be paid institutionally anyway (crime, poverty, social welfare programs.) I knew someone who never went to high school because her broke parents were too poor to afford the $50/year fee; if that fee were waived, that $200 would've paid for itself many times over in reduced social welfare costs.
And instead she got to chill out for four years to save 15c/day? Sorry, I'm not buying it. Either they were so dirt-ass poor that she was doing paid or unpaid child labor to help the family like a third world country, in which case the fee is just the tip of the iceberg of lost income or they're crack addicts who can't keep two dollars in their pocket and wouldn't piss on their kids if they were on fire. There's just no way I believe that this fee was the only thing standing between her and a high school diploma.
I think someone needs to "make the init system great, again"
More like KISS, basically if all you want is boot -> run -> shutdown in an easy to understand sequence then SysVinit is fine. If you're lucky suspend/resume works too, if you don't get fancy and change attached devices. Simple init.d scripts to start and stop without dependency management. For the people that don't need any more than that everything else will be a massive overcomplification. For those who want a full system resource and container/service management solution it'll never be enough. But I'd say the latter won when Debian switched to systemd, now it's only a matter of time.
In a basic logic test any information withheld, even if by omission makes evidence untrue. The act of obtaining something illegally creates vice and calls into question the motivations surrounding the evidence collection process.
No, a basic logic test says that the presence or absence of evidence and how or why it was gathered doesn't change the truth. It could certainly call into question the validity of the evidence, but often it's just the foot in the door or it is no more questionable than say the motives of a witness. If somebody finds a kidnapping victim chained in my basement, it doesn't matter if it is a reasonable or unreasonable search, warrant or no warrant, police or a burglar or an electrician I legally permitted entry because the victim will testify that I'm the kidnapper and there will be no reasonable doubt. If the case is thrown out the purpose is to avoid post-hoc justifications where they can search every basement in every house in case there is a kidnapping victim chained there, they're throwing out good evidence to punish a bad process. Which is why permission to lie about the process is bad, it's basically a license to go full totalitarian and only cherry pick bits to use when you want people to go to jail. Gestapo would be proud.
Nobody should jump on a far out theory unless there's some substantial evidence to support it and that's where conspiracy theorists jump off the deep end. For example compare "pizzagate" with the catholic church's abuse of alter boys, the claims are quite comparable. But when you look at the actual evidence to support the allegations you quickly see the difference between a 4chan circle jerk and a real conspiracy. Conspiracy theories always go in circles between the same crackpot sites confirming each other backed up by YouTube "documentaries".
The real story here, is that 4 days after the vulnerability was made known to the devs, a patch was released.
Why? If no bad guys have found it the difference between four days or and three months is of little difference. If the bad guys have found it (or worse yet, planted it) the difference between five years and four days and five years and three months is also of little difference. Not the kind of casual bad guys that deal with cryptolockers and botnets and identity theft, if they found it you'd probably see it in the wild and exposed. But targeted attacks for industrial espionage and such could probably use it in narrow attacks for a long time before being spotted.
Slashdot Mirror
Wouldn't have to. When you are in a car and you press "set" on the indicator stock, you are operating the vehicle and delegating a part of that operation to the car. This is a natural extension of that. Uber engineers have DLs and know the rules of the road. You don't license the car or the equipment, you license the operator and they delegate.
I'd be extremely surprised if there were no laws defining what a street legal car is and rules for safety critical systems and what is and is not delegated. If we go back to before ABS was ubiquitous, it was my responsibility to pump-brake so I could steer and brake at the same time. If I floor it now in a car with ABS, I'd say it's the car's responsibility. The liability would be a civil matter and a matter between me and the car company, but when did the criminal responsibility with regards to negligence and reckless driving pass? That's between me and the law. I assume it passed in some form of approval process.
I expect that whatever system Uber has installed is experimental and not approved and thus illegal. If it was purely informational and advisory like say GPS navigation or a rear view camera it would be okay, but once you have a system that can actually interfere in the driving I can't imagine that it's free reign. You can't road test your new brake system just because you want to and will pay the bills.
We want to make a PR stunt to show that regulation is killing innovation in the industry and that we're the hip and cool future while our legal team thinks we'll be able to backpedal in time to avoid major economic penalties.
Would not want to be on that drill crew. Falling into lava or getting splashed with lava is just about the worst way I can imagine to die.
I'd think falling into 1000C melted rock would make you pass out pretty much instantly, anything that kills me in under a minute would at least be over pretty quick. The worst kinds of dying seem to be where your body or mind is slowly falling apart with increasing pain and incapacitation while taking a really long time to actually kill you. That some of them long for a quick death to the point of wanting assisted suicide says a lot. What's worse than losing your life is having a life not worth living.
If there is the fear that corrupt or tyrannical authorities would confiscate them, that's a risk they run every moment. Such an authority would probably already have control over all ISPs in that country, making it impossible to do a mobile cloud back-up. Best solution would be copy the stuff to the laptop and encrypt it there, rather than make 3 camera companies make something that adds hundreds of $$$ to the price of a camera
What it'll cost in design and they'll charge for it is another matter, but SD card speed hardware encryption is achieved in a few thousand logic gates and single digit milliwatts of power and the rest is basically software management. On the hardware bill of materials I'm thinking $5 tops. Whether they want to is less certain, it also sounds like a function many people trying to take creepy shots would use and cause bad PR.
I know it's not exactly difficult to manually assign an IP, but only if you know what you're doing.
I thought you said they were Win10 users.
I'm sorry, but this is bullcrap. The greatest number of deaths through war have come from non-religious origins. Taking religion out of man has lead to the deaths of ten of millions if not hundreds of millions of people. Religion couldn't touch that scale if they wanted to. 31 Million people have died because of religion in recorded history. Stalin killed 50 Million people in his life.
Meh, only because we haven't done any major religious wars in recent history they've been quite significant for their time. The day India/Pakistan, Israel/Middle East or indigenous/migrant Europe goes up in flames it'll easily be a WWII-class war.
Since when is no estimates a subsitute for poor estimates? It's done when it's done, we'll get there when we get there, it'll run out of power when it runs out. Let's not try to find any answers because they'll be based on assumptions and have uncertainty and won't be perfect.
I agree that sometimes the estimates are as good as they get and the only way to know more is to actually try, but if you do say a 30 minute average and tell people it's an average of the last 30 minutes that's a reasonably good indication. Don't let perfect be the enemy of good.
They saw that the future was laptops and more powerful CPU+IGP solutions than Intel could offer. But I don't think they truly understood how much marrying themselves to ATI would allow Intel to make a move on nVidia and the graphics market. Intel took the opportunity to kill off third party chipsets giving them in practice full control over the motherboard and integrate their IGP into the CPU so every sale was a bundle. By having AMD open the door Intel could do it without any real anti-trust issues, I think they had to pay off nVidia a little but they got what they wanted.
If they'd not bought ATI then Intel could have had both ATI and nVidia turn against them as Intel tried to move in, with AMD having the pick of the crop. Or even if Intel had bought ATI as there was rumors then nVidia would become their natural ally for free. Look for example at the gaming market, we're buying quad-core chips with huge IGPs we don't need because we'll be using dGPU(s) anyway, but Intel has still made it better value than hex-cores with X99 motherboards. They can do that because there's no choice, Zen is targeting the gamer simply by using all the die space for the CPU. AMD has to start thinking about how the competition will act in response.
That might mean the project is approaching commercial feasibility, that they'd do research projects and concept cars by themselves is fine but I never believed Google would become a car manufacturer. You can't compare Chromebooks or Chromecast to the engineering complexity of a car, to start from the ground up like Tesla they'd need forever both in time and money. OTOH there's no reason to start partnering until you're really close to something so you have to mate the sensor grid with a particular car design. Let's get this show on the road :)
The premise for the suit is quite creative. And absurd. Its only chance is finding a sympathetic (read: nationalistic) jury. I guess it's worth a shot considering all the protectionist rhetoric that was thrown around during this election cycle.
I think it's mostly a ploy by the lawyers to get Disney to trip up by explaining that it's not racism just price dumping.
Clearly someone is making some serious $$$ by perpetuating this system. Who?
Mostly executives pushing the cost ahead of them. Hire cheaper staff, costs go down quick and product quality and reputation slower so short term you boost margins, raise the stock price, collect your quarterly bonus and leave as a great CEO. Hire more expensive staff, costs go up quick while product quality and reputation only slowly gets better, magins are down, stock price is down, no bonuses and everybody is unhappy with you. Usually you're shuffled out of office before your investments pay off. Nobody's come up with good incentives to punish those who flush the company's long term future down the drain. It's only the employees that go down with the sinking ship.
Not true. They sell their investments to other investors. That by itself has zero effect on your investment. But if this happens enough, it signals the market that these investments may not be as worthwhile, and new investors may offer lower prices as a result. Down goes your portfolio.
Except there are plenty oligarchs that don't have to consider the public opinion and will invest in whatever is legal and makes money. Look at the tobacco industry, arms industry, porn industry or any kind of business some may find morally questionable and a few "ethical" non-investors don't matter at all. If you sell out slowly you do nothing and if you dump it quick you're just offering arbitrage until the price is back where it should be. There's only two things that matter, whether the underlying business is affected too or whether you'll run out of even more shady characters to sell it to if you want out. The latter you can forget about, we're talking coal plants and ICE cars here not child labor sweatshops and illegal arms trade.
As for the market, I'd say most of it is lukewarm to being "green". It's not like running around with a fur coat or animal-tested cosmetics, most people manage quite fine to justify that they need a "gas guzzler" and until there's a decent alternative they're not bad people for having one. It's not hard to find some over the top eco-hippie to prove nothing will ever be enough, if you don't want to give it any effort at all. Making funds sell out of fossil fuel car companies does nothing if you can't convince people to stop buying fossil fuel cars. It's just mental masturbation to pretend you're doing something for the environment.
That could be, in part, because the link between salary and job satisfaction is very weak. According to a meta-analysis by University of Florida business school professor Timothy Judge and other researchers, there's less than a 2% overlap between the two factors.
Because we trade away one for the other in context, say you're a doctor. You could run a private clinic for fat cat clients and make big bucks. Or you could work for "Doctors Without Borders" doing humanitarian work for shitty pay and great job satisfaction. But you wouldn't go flip burgers at McDonald's for shitty pay and shitty job satisfaction. This could get very confusing for a statistician, because if you average it out the low wage earner seems pretty happy but really it's a mix of no choice and deliberate choice. That means we tend to get happier when we increase our potential, being eligible to get a $60k job and picking a $30k job will be completely different than when a $30k job is the most you can make. And if your priorities change you can probably find a $60k job later. Having attractive job skills is never a bad thing, even if you're not profit-maximizing.
Also the Surface Studio is looking like a real winner.
Winner or loser it seems like an extreme niche product. More like a symbolic jab at Apple about who is the artist's choice than anything that'll show up on the bottom line in a big way.
What Watson did is something any intern with time on his or her hands could have achieved by looking at the data, searching in a medical database, and then a long bit of drudgery finding the wheat among the chaff.
And perhaps the important part is that the wheat:chaff ratio is only getting worse as we get more and more knowledge about increasingly obscure conditions. Practically we can only ask doctors to learn this much before they have to start practicing medicine. Practically we don't have time for interns to chase needles in a haystack very often.
Sure, in theory you could boil it down to a theory of indicators and counter-indicators combined with tables on base incidence and prevalence, modifiers for age, sex and other risk factors, co-morbidity with known conditions etc. and then this would be almost pure math and probability. In practice it's usually not that easy to make the data that structured though, and then you need Watson to say that what researcher A said in this paper is the same as doctor B wrote in this journal.
I bet it blows your mind that the people they're fighting are also muslims.
Because...?
I was walking across a bridge one day, and I saw a man standing on the edge, about to jump. I ran over and said: "Stop. Don't do it."
"Why shouldn't I?" he asked.
"Well, there's so much to live for!"
"Like what?"
"Are you religious?"
He said: "Yes."
I said: "Me too. Are you Christian or Buddhist?"
"Christian."
"Me too. Are you Catholic or Protestant?"
"Protestant."
"Me too. Are you Episcopalian or Baptist?"
"Baptist."
"Wow. Me too. Are you Baptist Church of God or Baptist Church of the Lord?"
"Baptist Church of God."
"Me too. Are you original Baptist Church of God, or are you Reformed Baptist Church of God?"
"Reformed Baptist Church of God."
"Me too. Are you Reformed Baptist Church of God, Reformation of 1879, or Reformed Baptist Church of God, Reformation of 1915?"
He said: "Reformed Baptist Church of God, Reformation of 1915."
I said: "Die, heretic scum," and pushed him off.
Religious wackos can rant and rave about people who believe in false gods or worse no gods at all, but worst of all are those who believe in a "perverted" version of their own god and those who've abandoned the faith. Not sure what your point is though, I care about how many people want to kill me, how many other people they want to kill is of lesser concern.
If they actually tried, there are meta-scams that don't actually do anything they just pretend to hold your files hostage. It's like robbing someone with a replica gun, if the victim can't tell and you don't try to shoot anything it works just the same. The kind of victim they're looking for with lots of high-value data and no backups is probably just going to panic and pay anyway, since it's pretty much established that there is no "fix" for a crypto-locked machine.
Initially the robots are only just a bit cheaper than labour, so slow introduction and minimal price changes. But over time, they get better and cheaper, until anyone that still relies on labour will not be able to compete.
Most of the cost is software, once you have a working system the money is in volume. Right now it's going real slow but once you have say 1% self-driving cars on the road and they're starting to look at cash-positive margins you'll see a huge and quick ramp-up with entire fleets switching. Same thing with big chains with tens of thousands of outlets, either it's just a subsidized experiment/R&D/trial project or it'll be massive. It's just in the nature of working on a common system, it either works for almost nobody or almost everybody. That in between period will pass awfully quick compared to a human's career expectations.
Seriously, should I have used lmgtfy?
No, just stop feeding the troll.
Institutional unemployment is best paid for institutionally (free education) or else the problems will be paid institutionally anyway (crime, poverty, social welfare programs.) I knew someone who never went to high school because her broke parents were too poor to afford the $50/year fee; if that fee were waived, that $200 would've paid for itself many times over in reduced social welfare costs.
And instead she got to chill out for four years to save 15c/day? Sorry, I'm not buying it. Either they were so dirt-ass poor that she was doing paid or unpaid child labor to help the family like a third world country, in which case the fee is just the tip of the iceberg of lost income or they're crack addicts who can't keep two dollars in their pocket and wouldn't piss on their kids if they were on fire. There's just no way I believe that this fee was the only thing standing between her and a high school diploma.
I think someone needs to "make the init system great, again"
More like KISS, basically if all you want is boot -> run -> shutdown in an easy to understand sequence then SysVinit is fine. If you're lucky suspend/resume works too, if you don't get fancy and change attached devices. Simple init.d scripts to start and stop without dependency management. For the people that don't need any more than that everything else will be a massive overcomplification. For those who want a full system resource and container/service management solution it'll never be enough. But I'd say the latter won when Debian switched to systemd, now it's only a matter of time.
In a basic logic test any information withheld, even if by omission makes evidence untrue. The act of obtaining something illegally creates vice and calls into question the motivations surrounding the evidence collection process.
No, a basic logic test says that the presence or absence of evidence and how or why it was gathered doesn't change the truth. It could certainly call into question the validity of the evidence, but often it's just the foot in the door or it is no more questionable than say the motives of a witness. If somebody finds a kidnapping victim chained in my basement, it doesn't matter if it is a reasonable or unreasonable search, warrant or no warrant, police or a burglar or an electrician I legally permitted entry because the victim will testify that I'm the kidnapper and there will be no reasonable doubt. If the case is thrown out the purpose is to avoid post-hoc justifications where they can search every basement in every house in case there is a kidnapping victim chained there, they're throwing out good evidence to punish a bad process. Which is why permission to lie about the process is bad, it's basically a license to go full totalitarian and only cherry pick bits to use when you want people to go to jail. Gestapo would be proud.
Nobody should jump on a far out theory unless there's some substantial evidence to support it and that's where conspiracy theorists jump off the deep end. For example compare "pizzagate" with the catholic church's abuse of alter boys, the claims are quite comparable. But when you look at the actual evidence to support the allegations you quickly see the difference between a 4chan circle jerk and a real conspiracy. Conspiracy theories always go in circles between the same crackpot sites confirming each other backed up by YouTube "documentaries".
- old tube AM radio to take apart (I was 5 years old and had already been passionate about electricity and electronics for the previous 3 years or so)
Dilbert, is that you?
The real story here, is that 4 days after the vulnerability was made known to the devs, a patch was released.
Why? If no bad guys have found it the difference between four days or and three months is of little difference. If the bad guys have found it (or worse yet, planted it) the difference between five years and four days and five years and three months is also of little difference. Not the kind of casual bad guys that deal with cryptolockers and botnets and identity theft, if they found it you'd probably see it in the wild and exposed. But targeted attacks for industrial espionage and such could probably use it in narrow attacks for a long time before being spotted.