. Both Uber and Levandowski should spend some serious jail time
You can't throw a company in Jail. However, as I have said many times over, we should be able to throw everyone involved at Uber in Jail, including all the CxOs and the entire board of directors.
The fix for corporate malfeasance isn't fining a company, but jailing everyone involved. Oh, and corporate death penalty, by revoking the Corporation's charter. Leave the investors hanging onto worthless stock, and corporate culture will change.
How about blaming him for what his Administration did, which was spy on Americans (not once or even twice). And I don't give a shit about politicians lying, that ship sailed when Clinton wagged is finger at every American a lied, and the left didn't give a shit, because they thought a blowjob was funny.. or whatever.
Liberals have standards, all double.
So, ignore the obvious, Obama spied on Americans all the time, we know this because we've caught him at least three times doing it. Obama isn't the saint the left wants him to be. Both parties are filled with douche bags
Pointing to bad behavior to excuse or misdirect other bad behavior doesn't fly with me.
Dragnet caught Trump vs Obama was spying on Trump directly, the result is the same, so you're arguing semantics. Further, Rice's request to unmask and then leak that information was clearly a breach of the spirit of the law, if not breaking the law.
But keep telling yourself that the Obama Administration farted rainbows.The fact that this wasn't the FIRST time Obama admin spied on Americans. Or the second.
Again, don't let the repeated offenses bother you.
It has been going on for a long time. But here is the thing, Obama made campaign promises to start ripping the system down, and instead, as revealed by several cases, used it to spy on Americans and Journalists. And that makes him actually worse than GWB who did a lot of it. At least we knew what we were getting with GWB, Obama ended up being a backstabbing weasel.
Chrome is Chrome is Chrome. Moving to 64 bit makes sense simply because of memory management issue. My current Chrome usage of RAM is well over 4 GB (lots of windows open), and I suspect that most people are using way more RAM than they think.
Or, remove any reference to who the person doing the coding was in the first place. You could easily do this in any number of ways. The easiest would be to submit the code to be reviewed, and be handed a secure token so that it can be traced back once the review process is complete. From there, the programmer can get the code back to fix/update or be revealed once code is approved.
This way Code Snippet has a reference number and that is all the reviewers see.
But I know that programmers often collaborate and share ideas and get help solving issues all the time, so if the reviewers are other coders, it because easier to know who the authors are, by style.
ARPANET, was 40 years ago. The internet and beyond have grown up, largely apart from Government interference. The real growth was after commercial access. But don't let the facts get in your way.
And ARPANET isn't responsible for almost all the technology built on Layers 1-3. Which is where I want to solve the problem. NetNeutrality is layers 3-5 (and 9). But you got me, ouch
No, NetNeutrality says COMCAST (aka UPS) can only provide services the government deems appropriate. That it must carry boxes, and packages, and dogs and cats, and people, and robots all the same in the same trucks. My solution is to build a road and let COMCAST carry exactly what it wants, Netflix can offer its services, HULU.. HBO, NETNEUT (geek special) can all provide services and compete for the use of the ROAD (wire).
the principle that Internet service providers should enable access to all content and applications regardless of the source, and without favoring or blocking particular products or websites
That is rose tinted view of how packet shaping, QOS and so on behave. How do you prevent spam on your network, when it is classified the exact same as high priority public safety data? How do you throttle the asswipe who has a Porn Torrent setup, sucking all the bandwidth the ISP has to offer? Your scenario says modern routing and traffic shaping that makes the internet functional as bad.
Everyone packetshapes. The problem is lack of competition for the last mile. Change that, and you'll have all the Net Neutrality you want, and can afford from the vendor of your choice (and no bandwidth because that asswipe wants the same thing to abuse) and I'll get my properly tuned network connection from the vendor I choose. I can see how that is a bitch for you though, my way doesn't dictate to anyone anything.
How do you avoid Crony capitalism at the Federal level? You move to a different country. Good luck with that. Or you vote them, and enough of the 535 other members of congress/senate out of office. Good luck with that
How do you avoid Crony capitalism at the State level? You move to a different state. Easier, but not always better. Or you vote the state legislature representative out of office, and enough of the other people's representatives.. good luck with that.
How do you avoid Crony capitalism at the local level? You move across the city line to the next city over. OR you vote them cronies out next election, which is fairly easy to organize. Recalls of Municipal representatives is fairly common.
So, basically what we have now is "Crony capitalism" in the form of Franchise agreements creating monopolies for telco/cable companies, from an era before the Internet. THAT is statism at its utter worst.
And it isn't designing a network, any more than paving a road creates a "Transportation system".
My solution is have the Layer 1,2 done (last mile) by local municipality, and layers 3-7 managed by both the vendor and customer. Layer 3 and 4 are where Net Neutrality is applied, and sits right in the middle of the stack. The higher up the chain, the worse the intrusion.
By moving the problem to layer 2 and not 3 and up, all the complaints by the Net Neutrality advocates are arguing about, go away.
HyperLiberals and HyperConservatives can get the service they want, from providers they agree with politically, and the rest of us can get more advanced services and capabilities we can only dream of today by competitive vendors.
The problem isn't difficult, it just requires changing how we look at it.
A wire is Layer 1/2. A network takes 7 layers. Net Neutrality, from a layer perspective is 3,4 and possibly 5, right in the middle of the entire stack. That is where you're trying to regulate.
A wire doesn't make a network, it makes a connection. If I can choose which "network" I am attaching to, then it isn't a "government" anything. Just infrastructure.
Kind of like a road does not make a transportation system. A Road provides a conduit, and I can chose the method of travel, from a Tesla to F250 Super Duty to a panel Van. I get to choose. Net Neutrality is like saying I have to use a Prius to haul 2 tons of bricks, or I have to us USPS instead of Fed/Ex or UPS.
No thanks. Remove the barrier to competition, and you'll see real innovation. Something government sucks at.
More taxes, taxes the rich can avoid, and the poor pay through the nose. Thanks for adding another tax to my growing list of "Taxes are Regressive" examples.
Yep. This is being bought and paid for by large ISPs.
of course it is. Net Neutrality also has backers, mostly liberals who want to control everything via Government decree.
Your assumption is that one is better than the other, where mine is that both are equally valid. One view is no more valid than the other. Government has no right to decree what goes on the wire, because it isn't government's wires.
Net Neutrality is anything but. It is government designed networking. Last thing we need is more government interference.
It sounds good, but the real solution isn't government controlled rules and regulations, lawsuits and red tape. It is free and open markets.
The problem is, this is more government rules and regulations to fix the last generation of government rules and regulations that caused monopoly franchise agreements with single companies, creating a monopoly. The solution is to remove the impediments to free markets by removing the source of the problem, last mile. This is easily solved, by allowing municipalities to build out common infrastructure that can be used by anyone to any provider. That way, we let the market decided what people actually want, and provide a choice.
History is a reflection of today. The problem is, you don't recognize the change from "uppity" people (meaning blacks) to "uppity people" meaning anyone that doesn't bow to the Socialist agenda. Black people rioting in rebellion to GAIN free speech (and other rights) aren't the same as people rioting to PREVENT people from speaking. You don't fight "fascism" by becoming fascist.
Or, in simpler terms: My mom taught us "two wrongs don't make a right".
And as long as people excuse tyranny because they get something from it (like you did here, tacitly), their no better off than the people they supposedly hate.
And if you REALLY were against what happened to the blacks in history past, you'd never belong to the same party as the KKK, Jim Crow, and Slavery (Being the Democrats) And yes, I realize you're going to tell me that the Democrat party changed platforms and doesn't represent that any more.... except that only the Democrat party tries to keep Black people in the inner cities and trapped in a failed democratic run system that keeps them "down". The nice thing is, blacks are starting to realize that the Democrat Machine needs them, and needs them enslaved to their system. Nothing has changed. Rich White People telling Poor Oppressed Black People why they must support the plantation system. Obama was nothing more than a slave master's tool.
the problem that the state does not constantly adequately intervene to protect unpopular opinions is suddenly an existential crisis.
It wasn't really a problem since... mid 70's at the latest. Not until Obama took office, and they started to chant about murdering cops, shooting them, rioting BlackBloc in the streets, protesting everything an nothing at the same time "burn this bitch down" over a bratty bully who thought he could kill a cop, and the whole lie of "Hands Up Don't Shoot" which never happened.
But yeah, it is just "suddenly" but you refuse to realize that Obama and the DNC have set race relations back 50 years. Impressive.
Perhaps if the right stopped being a bunch of racist, sexist, misogynists, the left would have time to tackle other issues
Yeah, there it is, you can't help it can you. It is actually funny at this point. Go join your local Blackbloc rioters to show your tolerance. That's all you got. Keep it up, and never win another election (except in PDR of California)
By "too far left" you mean "lots of government"... then probably. Because the alternative is always more government as a solution to everything, right?
If you have a governance system whereby individual liberty is the crowning jewel, it leads to social constructs that function for everyone equally. We don't have this anymore. People can riot and prevent others from speaking freely, and that is now "acceptable" and not squashed by police. Your right to riot ends when the it violates my peaceful rights to speak freely (and destruction of property).
Enforcement of social constructs should be very limited, and by a governance that is equally limited (as part of that social contract). We have such a restricted contract, that has be abrogated by the "commerce clause", to the point of being almost worthless to protecting individual rights, in favor of the collective.
Slashdot Mirror
. Both Uber and Levandowski should spend some serious jail time
You can't throw a company in Jail. However, as I have said many times over, we should be able to throw everyone involved at Uber in Jail, including all the CxOs and the entire board of directors.
The fix for corporate malfeasance isn't fining a company, but jailing everyone involved. Oh, and corporate death penalty, by revoking the Corporation's charter. Leave the investors hanging onto worthless stock, and corporate culture will change.
Clicking the link doesn't hack the account. Adding permissions does. There is another "allow" button that actually causes the "hack" to work.
Change your passwords folks.
How does clicking a link cause someone's account to be compromised? There is more to the story than clicking the link
How about blaming him for what his Administration did, which was spy on Americans (not once or even twice). And I don't give a shit about politicians lying, that ship sailed when Clinton wagged is finger at every American a lied, and the left didn't give a shit, because they thought a blowjob was funny .. or whatever.
Liberals have standards, all double.
So, ignore the obvious, Obama spied on Americans all the time, we know this because we've caught him at least three times doing it. Obama isn't the saint the left wants him to be. Both parties are filled with douche bags
Pointing to bad behavior to excuse or misdirect other bad behavior doesn't fly with me.
Dragnet caught Trump vs Obama was spying on Trump directly, the result is the same, so you're arguing semantics. Further, Rice's request to unmask and then leak that information was clearly a breach of the spirit of the law, if not breaking the law.
But keep telling yourself that the Obama Administration farted rainbows.The fact that this wasn't the FIRST time Obama admin spied on Americans. Or the second.
Again, don't let the repeated offenses bother you.
It's been going on even before that.
It has been going on for a long time. But here is the thing, Obama made campaign promises to start ripping the system down, and instead, as revealed by several cases, used it to spy on Americans and Journalists. And that makes him actually worse than GWB who did a lot of it. At least we knew what we were getting with GWB, Obama ended up being a backstabbing weasel.
what a load of crap.
Chrome is Chrome is Chrome. Moving to 64 bit makes sense simply because of memory management issue. My current Chrome usage of RAM is well over 4 GB (lots of windows open), and I suspect that most people are using way more RAM than they think.
Or, remove any reference to who the person doing the coding was in the first place. You could easily do this in any number of ways. The easiest would be to submit the code to be reviewed, and be handed a secure token so that it can be traced back once the review process is complete. From there, the programmer can get the code back to fix/update or be revealed once code is approved.
This way Code Snippet has a reference number and that is all the reviewers see.
But I know that programmers often collaborate and share ideas and get help solving issues all the time, so if the reviewers are other coders, it because easier to know who the authors are, by style.
ARPANET, was 40 years ago. The internet and beyond have grown up, largely apart from Government interference. The real growth was after commercial access. But don't let the facts get in your way.
And ARPANET isn't responsible for almost all the technology built on Layers 1-3. Which is where I want to solve the problem. NetNeutrality is layers 3-5 (and 9). But you got me, ouch
No, NetNeutrality says COMCAST (aka UPS) can only provide services the government deems appropriate. That it must carry boxes, and packages, and dogs and cats, and people, and robots all the same in the same trucks. My solution is to build a road and let COMCAST carry exactly what it wants, Netflix can offer its services, HULU .. HBO, NETNEUT (geek special) can all provide services and compete for the use of the ROAD (wire).
the principle that Internet service providers should enable access to all content and applications regardless of the source, and without favoring or blocking particular products or websites
That is rose tinted view of how packet shaping, QOS and so on behave. How do you prevent spam on your network, when it is classified the exact same as high priority public safety data? How do you throttle the asswipe who has a Porn Torrent setup, sucking all the bandwidth the ISP has to offer? Your scenario says modern routing and traffic shaping that makes the internet functional as bad.
Everyone packetshapes. The problem is lack of competition for the last mile. Change that, and you'll have all the Net Neutrality you want, and can afford from the vendor of your choice (and no bandwidth because that asswipe wants the same thing to abuse) and I'll get my properly tuned network connection from the vendor I choose. I can see how that is a bitch for you though, my way doesn't dictate to anyone anything.
Both. GWB did it Obama said he repeal it to get elected and piled on when he won. Both parties are responsible.
Vote Libertarian if you value real liberty, because neither the (R) or (D) parties really care about liberty, only about power.
How do you avoid Crony capitalism at the Federal level? You move to a different country. Good luck with that. Or you vote them, and enough of the 535 other members of congress/senate out of office. Good luck with that
How do you avoid Crony capitalism at the State level? You move to a different state. Easier, but not always better. Or you vote the state legislature representative out of office, and enough of the other people's representatives .. good luck with that.
How do you avoid Crony capitalism at the local level? You move across the city line to the next city over. OR you vote them cronies out next election, which is fairly easy to organize. Recalls of Municipal representatives is fairly common.
So, basically what we have now is "Crony capitalism" in the form of Franchise agreements creating monopolies for telco/cable companies, from an era before the Internet. THAT is statism at its utter worst.
And it isn't designing a network, any more than paving a road creates a "Transportation system".
My solution is have the Layer 1,2 done (last mile) by local municipality, and layers 3-7 managed by both the vendor and customer. Layer 3 and 4 are where Net Neutrality is applied, and sits right in the middle of the stack. The higher up the chain, the worse the intrusion.
By moving the problem to layer 2 and not 3 and up, all the complaints by the Net Neutrality advocates are arguing about, go away.
HyperLiberals and HyperConservatives can get the service they want, from providers they agree with politically, and the rest of us can get more advanced services and capabilities we can only dream of today by competitive vendors.
The problem isn't difficult, it just requires changing how we look at it.
A wire is Layer 1/2. A network takes 7 layers. Net Neutrality, from a layer perspective is 3,4 and possibly 5, right in the middle of the entire stack. That is where you're trying to regulate.
A wire doesn't make a network, it makes a connection. If I can choose which "network" I am attaching to, then it isn't a "government" anything. Just infrastructure.
Kind of like a road does not make a transportation system. A Road provides a conduit, and I can chose the method of travel, from a Tesla to F250 Super Duty to a panel Van. I get to choose. Net Neutrality is like saying I have to use a Prius to haul 2 tons of bricks, or I have to us USPS instead of Fed/Ex or UPS.
No thanks. Remove the barrier to competition, and you'll see real innovation. Something government sucks at.
More taxes, taxes the rich can avoid, and the poor pay through the nose. Thanks for adding another tax to my growing list of "Taxes are Regressive" examples.
whatever they default to for California.
California is a long N/S state, (750 miles/ 1250km). I doubt that there is a one size fits all "default" in CA
Yep. This is being bought and paid for by large ISPs.
of course it is. Net Neutrality also has backers, mostly liberals who want to control everything via Government decree.
Your assumption is that one is better than the other, where mine is that both are equally valid. One view is no more valid than the other. Government has no right to decree what goes on the wire, because it isn't government's wires.
Net Neutrality is anything but. It is government designed networking. Last thing we need is more government interference.
It sounds good, but the real solution isn't government controlled rules and regulations, lawsuits and red tape. It is free and open markets.
The problem is, this is more government rules and regulations to fix the last generation of government rules and regulations that caused monopoly franchise agreements with single companies, creating a monopoly. The solution is to remove the impediments to free markets by removing the source of the problem, last mile. This is easily solved, by allowing municipalities to build out common infrastructure that can be used by anyone to any provider. That way, we let the market decided what people actually want, and provide a choice.
History is a reflection of today. The problem is, you don't recognize the change from "uppity" people (meaning blacks) to "uppity people" meaning anyone that doesn't bow to the Socialist agenda. Black people rioting in rebellion to GAIN free speech (and other rights) aren't the same as people rioting to PREVENT people from speaking. You don't fight "fascism" by becoming fascist.
Or, in simpler terms: My mom taught us "two wrongs don't make a right".
And as long as people excuse tyranny because they get something from it (like you did here, tacitly), their no better off than the people they supposedly hate.
And if you REALLY were against what happened to the blacks in history past, you'd never belong to the same party as the KKK, Jim Crow, and Slavery (Being the Democrats) And yes, I realize you're going to tell me that the Democrat party changed platforms and doesn't represent that any more.... except that only the Democrat party tries to keep Black people in the inner cities and trapped in a failed democratic run system that keeps them "down". The nice thing is, blacks are starting to realize that the Democrat Machine needs them, and needs them enslaved to their system. Nothing has changed. Rich White People telling Poor Oppressed Black People why they must support the plantation system. Obama was nothing more than a slave master's tool.
the problem that the state does not constantly adequately intervene to protect unpopular opinions is suddenly an existential crisis.
It wasn't really a problem since ... mid 70's at the latest. Not until Obama took office, and they started to chant about murdering cops, shooting them, rioting BlackBloc in the streets, protesting everything an nothing at the same time "burn this bitch down" over a bratty bully who thought he could kill a cop, and the whole lie of "Hands Up Don't Shoot" which never happened.
But yeah, it is just "suddenly" but you refuse to realize that Obama and the DNC have set race relations back 50 years. Impressive.
ooooh sad AC is so mean ... Waaaa.
Perhaps if the right stopped being a bunch of racist, sexist, misogynists, the left would have time to tackle other issues
Yeah, there it is, you can't help it can you. It is actually funny at this point. Go join your local Blackbloc rioters to show your tolerance. That's all you got. Keep it up, and never win another election (except in PDR of California)
By "too far left" you mean "lots of government" ... then probably. Because the alternative is always more government as a solution to everything, right?
Yeah, because I didn't vote for Trump or Clinton, I must be a Trump supporter. more wonderful binary logic ... yawn
If you have a governance system whereby individual liberty is the crowning jewel, it leads to social constructs that function for everyone equally. We don't have this anymore. People can riot and prevent others from speaking freely, and that is now "acceptable" and not squashed by police. Your right to riot ends when the it violates my peaceful rights to speak freely (and destruction of property).
Enforcement of social constructs should be very limited, and by a governance that is equally limited (as part of that social contract). We have such a restricted contract, that has be abrogated by the "commerce clause", to the point of being almost worthless to protecting individual rights, in favor of the collective.