You can't blame Ford for the bad driving of the people crashing their cars. You can blame Ford for faulty mechanics. Most of your comparison is based on bad drivers, not Mechanical Problems. For the Most part, cars are relatively safe until people start driving.
However, just about every IoT device that is faulty is broken by design. And they aren't being made by GE, Samsung or whatever, but by some Chinese fly-by-night cheap manufacturer for some IoT "inventor" who doesn't have the resources to pay out anything. That "massive lawsuit" isn't so massive. And the person you jailed, isn't the crappy manager who said "I don't care" when the engineer said that hard coding the username and password is a bad idea. I have that kind of boss right now, who thinks that convenience outweighs security, and will side with the idiot user against better judgement. After all, if it isn't easy for the average idiot, they won't buy it.
You really need to put the blame where it belongs... on the idiot user, who is responsible for their own damn choices.
Your problem is that you think that bankrupting one company is going to change anything. The operators will just spin up a new operation (corporation), and create new botnet nodes under another IoT fad.
THE only way to stop these botnets from forming is to not buy IoT devices. As convenient as they may be, they don't outweigh the inconvenience of a completely broken internet (of things)
1) Defeated by bankruptcy 2) Defeated by lobbying 3) Blood from turnips. Good luck with that.
Good luck with that. The problem is, these types of events are easily solvable, except the part where solving it requires cooperation. The whole "That's Not My Problem" response by just about everyone.The problem is, it is everyone's problem because just about everyone contributes to it. There is one almost IoT device for every person on earth already.
The biggest problem with IoT devices is that they are mostly replacing devices that are infrastructure (long lasting) devices that don't have to be updated, upgraded or patched, so nobody is thinking about the long term consequences of having to replace that thermostat every 3 years because it has expired support. I suspect that once you include the regular cost of replacing said device every couple years, the novelty of having a "smart thermostat" will wear off and the smart people will go back to regular unplugged thermostat, because the inconvenience of long term support isn't worth the convenience of having your heating and cooling by remote control.
The smart apps on my TV are useless. Your thermostat has been hacked. IMHO the IoT is a bust already, and it hasn't even got off the ground yet.
I'm surprised Comcast hasnt gone after Netflix already.
They have, and been caught. The whole Net Neutrality thing was over this very concept. The example was that the location of the Peering nodes were deliberately not upgraded an thus Netflix traffic was impacted. Netflix went so far as to say that they would pay for all the equipment needed at all of the peering locations, and even install CDN points INSIDE Comcast's network to help prevent the congestion problems for Comcast's Netflix customers. Comcast said no thanks.
Comcast has a vested interest in both Broadcast and Cable TV, and Netflix has a direct impact on both. Comcast is not going to help Netflix even if Netflix does all the work.
However, since this is all being done on the Network side, it is hidden (obfuscated) to the customer. All they know is Netflix streaming "sucks" a lot of the time, while Comcast streaming almost never does. The customer doesn't see it as a Comcast problem, they see it as a Netflix Problem.
I think you are confusing what is really happening here. I've seen all sorts of arguments about Hillary vs Donald and it almost always boils down to one basic argument.
1) Trump is worse than Clinton (Excusing bad behavior by pointing to other bad behavior).
They mostly try to avoid her actual record, because quite frankly it SUCKS.Her four years as SoS are a complete disaster. Her stint as Senator is mostly resume lining material (no actual accomplishments), and that she won because she was Bill's wife isn't really that great either. Basically, she has no record of accomplishments. None. Which is why she is playing the "gotcha" game, and sitting there wondering why she isn't "50 points ahead". Well, when you run douchbad against asshole (I'll let you figure out which is which), it is clear that she shouldn't be "50 points" ahead, and why they are basically neck n neck.
If everyone who actually believes that NEITHER are good for America, actually voted for Gary Johnson (or Jill Stein), it would cause chaos in the election.
Which is why they go through a series of training meeting, of which Clinton doesn't recall attending, due to traumatic brain injury, but she is okay to be president.
Another "convenient" excuse. She either didn't attend the requisite training (a dereliction of duty, and evidence she isn't qualified to be President) or she did, and ignorance is no longer an excuse. Now, you might claim she is too stupid to understand (as Director of the FBI basically said), but then that doesn't look to good if you're running for President either.
The whole EMAIL thing is a tar pit for the Clinton's because she is either incompetent, or evil. There really is no other option. And as I have said before, (apologies to Arthur C. Clarke) "Any sufficient level of incompetence is indistinguishable from malice". So which is it, is she incompetent or evil?
Of all the things Clinton should have done, she did none of them. The argument "no proof" is utter bullshit, there is plenty of evidence, and proof is only a conclusion. If you see all the evidence, and can't conclude she is either stupid or evil, you're just being an obtuse party hack.
But if we're going to use these emails as part of a measuring stick as to who is more trustworthy, when we tally up all lie and half truths of our major candidates
If your best case for your candidate is that "they lie less than the other guy", and there are a huge long line of lies both candidates have, you're making the best case I have that you shouldn't vote for either one.
The newest revelation is the darling Hispanic Woman who says (no actual proof, which is what you're claiming for Clinton now) Trump said some "mean things" to her, was allegedly involved in a murder, and had relationships with drug dealers. A perfect fit for the Clinton Crime Family if you ask me.
AND if everything about the Clinton's is "ancient history" (as said by others) then why are they digging up what some Drug Cartel's Leaders old girlfriend has to say from 20+ years ago?
The double standards people use in defending Clinton is amazing.
Actually the deletion of email was enough "evidence" of guilt because legally it can be assumed that doing so is evidence of guilt. Gowdy made that case when confronting the FBI director. In fact, Gowdy pretty much proved that the FBI was complicit in the coverup by not prosecuting Clinton on the grounds that the FBI director actually gave.
But there is more, Clinton's Lawyer AND personal Aide (convenient dual role) Mills said in sworn testimony that she didn't know about the server until after it was destroyed, but they just found an email in which she ASKS about that same server, years before. She perjured herself. But nothing will come of it, because she is both a Clinton Aide and her Lawyer. The convenience of having Aides that are also Lawyers will now be fully realized, they will be pretty much untouchable, because you cannot untangle when she was being a Lawyer, and when she was being an Aide.
The whole system and a large part of the government is corrupt to the point where nothing will be done.
I'm sure that even most liberals would agree, but the solution liberals have is "more government" (and thus, more corruption), rather than reigning in the corruption we have now by limiting government actions. Liberty is messy. The greatest promotion of Fascism was "at least the trains run on time" (nice neat orderly).
Which is why people still use the "But Bobby's Mom lets him smoke" argument, little kids try on parents. The thing of it is, we are supposed to be adults and not persuaded by childish arguments.
Pointing to another person's wrong NEVER justifies the wrong you're doing. Justice is never going to be exact, so we should stop trying comparison justice, and let each case stand on its own merits. Anything less leads to lawless anarchy.
No president can save "us". But collectivism thinks the "us" we elect, can save the "us" we are. Because we (us) end up shirking any responsibilty we (us) have to save ourselves. And then, we wonder why 8 years of Clinton, 8 Years of Bush, 8 years of Obama and we're not "saved" yet (and quite possibly worse off than ever).
So, Boo me all you want, but my views are on my profile, and you can review them all you want. Hillary is just another in a long line of people promising things she cannot deliver. I have no doubt that Trump is doing the same. The ONLY person speaking of what they ACTUALLY can deliver, is Gary Johnson. But everyone is too busy arguing over who is worse, Hillary or Donald. And if that is the real debate, then we are doomed.
No worries there mate. I am one of those people who aren't voting for either of them. Call my vote wasted, and that is fine, I couldn't vote for McCain, Obama, or that Mormon guy. I couldn't vote for GWB, Kerry, or Gore. And so on back to about Reagan (when I was young and stupid) whom I voted for. But that was the last of the two party candidates I actually voted for.
People misunderstand my attacks on Hillary as being "Pro Trump", which only exposes their illogical binary logic, "If you not for me, you're against me" (A. Skywalker/Darth Vader). I was recently accused of "hate" towards Hillary, and I said that I didn't hate her, I had contempt for her. Hate is a different connotation than contempt, but some people can't figure out how words have different meanings. I have similar contempt for Trump, and I don't hate him either.
I reserve the word "hate" for people that I have a visceral dislike for, and they actually have to have done something pretty awful to me or my family or friends. Wanna know someone I "hate" (he's probably dead now, may he burn in hell) it is...Brad Bishop (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradford_Bishop) I would quite literally kill that motherfucker if I ever see him. I would literally beat the crap of of that guy, and gut him, feed his own entrails to him, and say "Eat Shit and die asshole"... THAT is hate.
And when others do to them, that which they do to others, they cry butthurt tears and crawl as fast as they can to the same people they hated a few minutes ago to save their candyasses. They are the very hypocrites they whine about the most.
You think Hillary can save us? The laws don't apply to her, so we already know where this will go. Tyranny for every American, except the Clinton Crime Family.
If Blackberry bought something like Discord (or Slack), and integrated it with their corporate support software/systems (BBM for example), it could dominate one area of Smartphones, especially if they figure out how to secure the IM platform with good encryption end to end.
The problem is, that everyone is looking to get into the IM field now, from Google (Allo) to Facebook (Slack/FB for work). Google only has a slight lead, and only because it is huge. FB is such a "no touch" to many corporations that that is going to be a tough sell.
I am not sure how Blackberry could pull this off, but the one thing just about everyone loved was BBM, the problem was keeping it tied to the BB platform relegated it to "I'll give up BBM for better Smartphone (iPhone/Android) with a better ecosystem."
Blackberry thought it was invincible, and it is that hubris that caused it to make a series of really stupid moves over a long period of time. It survived only because it was a behemoth when the first mosquito bit it. It is dying now that it has been all but sucked dry.
I will not miss the tiny buttons on a Blackberry Keyboard. Once I learned to Swype, it was like a dream come true.
And if I can learn to Swype, anyone can. I have a big time small motor control problem with my hands, so typing on screen is only slightly worse than typing on little keyboards. Swype is much easier than trying finger type.
The above is purely my opinion. I am not a financial analyst.
You are absolutely correct. While they are burning money now, they have enough assets to last though this bit of a rough patch. And, if they sell off any patents they don't actually need (Hardware) to someone, they can add to their liquidity.
The fact is, there are plenty of/. "experts" who don't know shit about running a large enterprise business, but think they do. Mom N Pop doesn't scale, and far too many IT people live in that world (and make a good living at it)
Actually, this is more like Hillary saying Lowering Taxes delayed the recovery, and she is going to tax us more, so they can spend more. Because taxing people in a recession is a great way to get us out of recession.
Slashdot Mirror
You can't blame Ford for the bad driving of the people crashing their cars. You can blame Ford for faulty mechanics. Most of your comparison is based on bad drivers, not Mechanical Problems. For the Most part, cars are relatively safe until people start driving.
However, just about every IoT device that is faulty is broken by design. And they aren't being made by GE, Samsung or whatever, but by some Chinese fly-by-night cheap manufacturer for some IoT "inventor" who doesn't have the resources to pay out anything. That "massive lawsuit" isn't so massive. And the person you jailed, isn't the crappy manager who said "I don't care" when the engineer said that hard coding the username and password is a bad idea. I have that kind of boss right now, who thinks that convenience outweighs security, and will side with the idiot user against better judgement. After all, if it isn't easy for the average idiot, they won't buy it.
You really need to put the blame where it belongs ... on the idiot user, who is responsible for their own damn choices.
More like this is the start of Skynet. Just wait until the AI we are creating get a hold of all the IoT devices ...
Your problem is that you think that bankrupting one company is going to change anything. The operators will just spin up a new operation (corporation), and create new botnet nodes under another IoT fad.
THE only way to stop these botnets from forming is to not buy IoT devices. As convenient as they may be, they don't outweigh the inconvenience of a completely broken internet (of things)
You'd be dead too. ;)
1) Defeated by bankruptcy
2) Defeated by lobbying
3) Blood from turnips. Good luck with that.
Good luck with that. The problem is, these types of events are easily solvable, except the part where solving it requires cooperation. The whole "That's Not My Problem" response by just about everyone.The problem is, it is everyone's problem because just about everyone contributes to it. There is one almost IoT device for every person on earth already.
The biggest problem with IoT devices is that they are mostly replacing devices that are infrastructure (long lasting) devices that don't have to be updated, upgraded or patched, so nobody is thinking about the long term consequences of having to replace that thermostat every 3 years because it has expired support. I suspect that once you include the regular cost of replacing said device every couple years, the novelty of having a "smart thermostat" will wear off and the smart people will go back to regular unplugged thermostat, because the inconvenience of long term support isn't worth the convenience of having your heating and cooling by remote control.
The smart apps on my TV are useless.
Your thermostat has been hacked.
IMHO the IoT is a bust already, and it hasn't even got off the ground yet.
I'm surprised Comcast hasnt gone after Netflix already.
They have, and been caught. The whole Net Neutrality thing was over this very concept. The example was that the location of the Peering nodes were deliberately not upgraded an thus Netflix traffic was impacted. Netflix went so far as to say that they would pay for all the equipment needed at all of the peering locations, and even install CDN points INSIDE Comcast's network to help prevent the congestion problems for Comcast's Netflix customers. Comcast said no thanks.
Comcast has a vested interest in both Broadcast and Cable TV, and Netflix has a direct impact on both. Comcast is not going to help Netflix even if Netflix does all the work.
However, since this is all being done on the Network side, it is hidden (obfuscated) to the customer. All they know is Netflix streaming "sucks" a lot of the time, while Comcast streaming almost never does. The customer doesn't see it as a Comcast problem, they see it as a Netflix Problem.
I think you are confusing what is really happening here. I've seen all sorts of arguments about Hillary vs Donald and it almost always boils down to one basic argument.
1) Trump is worse than Clinton (Excusing bad behavior by pointing to other bad behavior).
They mostly try to avoid her actual record, because quite frankly it SUCKS.Her four years as SoS are a complete disaster. Her stint as Senator is mostly resume lining material (no actual accomplishments), and that she won because she was Bill's wife isn't really that great either. Basically, she has no record of accomplishments. None. Which is why she is playing the "gotcha" game, and sitting there wondering why she isn't "50 points ahead". Well, when you run douchbad against asshole (I'll let you figure out which is which), it is clear that she shouldn't be "50 points" ahead, and why they are basically neck n neck.
If everyone who actually believes that NEITHER are good for America, actually voted for Gary Johnson (or Jill Stein), it would cause chaos in the election.
"Bush was worse" logic of liberals ...
Pointing to bad behavior to excuse bad behavior is supposed to stop working when you're like 5 years old. Why does it still work with adults?
Which is why they go through a series of training meeting, of which Clinton doesn't recall attending, due to traumatic brain injury, but she is okay to be president.
Another "convenient" excuse. She either didn't attend the requisite training (a dereliction of duty, and evidence she isn't qualified to be President) or she did, and ignorance is no longer an excuse. Now, you might claim she is too stupid to understand (as Director of the FBI basically said), but then that doesn't look to good if you're running for President either.
The whole EMAIL thing is a tar pit for the Clinton's because she is either incompetent, or evil. There really is no other option. And as I have said before, (apologies to Arthur C. Clarke) "Any sufficient level of incompetence is indistinguishable from malice". So which is it, is she incompetent or evil?
Of all the things Clinton should have done, she did none of them. The argument "no proof" is utter bullshit, there is plenty of evidence, and proof is only a conclusion. If you see all the evidence, and can't conclude she is either stupid or evil, you're just being an obtuse party hack.
But if we're going to use these emails as part of a measuring stick as to who is more trustworthy, when we tally up all lie and half truths of our major candidates
If your best case for your candidate is that "they lie less than the other guy", and there are a huge long line of lies both candidates have, you're making the best case I have that you shouldn't vote for either one.
The newest revelation is the darling Hispanic Woman who says (no actual proof, which is what you're claiming for Clinton now) Trump said some "mean things" to her, was allegedly involved in a murder, and had relationships with drug dealers. A perfect fit for the Clinton Crime Family if you ask me.
AND if everything about the Clinton's is "ancient history" (as said by others) then why are they digging up what some Drug Cartel's Leaders old girlfriend has to say from 20+ years ago?
The double standards people use in defending Clinton is amazing.
Actually the deletion of email was enough "evidence" of guilt because legally it can be assumed that doing so is evidence of guilt. Gowdy made that case when confronting the FBI director. In fact, Gowdy pretty much proved that the FBI was complicit in the coverup by not prosecuting Clinton on the grounds that the FBI director actually gave.
But there is more, Clinton's Lawyer AND personal Aide (convenient dual role) Mills said in sworn testimony that she didn't know about the server until after it was destroyed, but they just found an email in which she ASKS about that same server, years before. She perjured herself. But nothing will come of it, because she is both a Clinton Aide and her Lawyer. The convenience of having Aides that are also Lawyers will now be fully realized, they will be pretty much untouchable, because you cannot untangle when she was being a Lawyer, and when she was being an Aide.
The whole system and a large part of the government is corrupt to the point where nothing will be done.
I'm sure that even most liberals would agree, but the solution liberals have is "more government" (and thus, more corruption), rather than reigning in the corruption we have now by limiting government actions. Liberty is messy. The greatest promotion of Fascism was "at least the trains run on time" (nice neat orderly).
Which is why people still use the "But Bobby's Mom lets him smoke" argument, little kids try on parents. The thing of it is, we are supposed to be adults and not persuaded by childish arguments.
Pointing to another person's wrong NEVER justifies the wrong you're doing. Justice is never going to be exact, so we should stop trying comparison justice, and let each case stand on its own merits. Anything less leads to lawless anarchy.
So says the Basement Dwelling AC. How's your mom?
No president can save "us". But collectivism thinks the "us" we elect, can save the "us" we are. Because we (us) end up shirking any responsibilty we (us) have to save ourselves. And then, we wonder why 8 years of Clinton, 8 Years of Bush, 8 years of Obama and we're not "saved" yet (and quite possibly worse off than ever).
So, Boo me all you want, but my views are on my profile, and you can review them all you want. Hillary is just another in a long line of people promising things she cannot deliver. I have no doubt that Trump is doing the same. The ONLY person speaking of what they ACTUALLY can deliver, is Gary Johnson. But everyone is too busy arguing over who is worse, Hillary or Donald. And if that is the real debate, then we are doomed.
It is a tie, they are both the worst.
No worries there mate. I am one of those people who aren't voting for either of them. Call my vote wasted, and that is fine, I couldn't vote for McCain, Obama, or that Mormon guy. I couldn't vote for GWB, Kerry, or Gore. And so on back to about Reagan (when I was young and stupid) whom I voted for. But that was the last of the two party candidates I actually voted for.
People misunderstand my attacks on Hillary as being "Pro Trump", which only exposes their illogical binary logic, "If you not for me, you're against me" (A. Skywalker/Darth Vader). I was recently accused of "hate" towards Hillary, and I said that I didn't hate her, I had contempt for her. Hate is a different connotation than contempt, but some people can't figure out how words have different meanings. I have similar contempt for Trump, and I don't hate him either.
I reserve the word "hate" for people that I have a visceral dislike for, and they actually have to have done something pretty awful to me or my family or friends. Wanna know someone I "hate" (he's probably dead now, may he burn in hell) it is ...Brad Bishop (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradford_Bishop) I would quite literally kill that motherfucker if I ever see him. I would literally beat the crap of of that guy, and gut him, feed his own entrails to him, and say "Eat Shit and die asshole" ... THAT is hate.
Another Racist rant.
Law and Order is fine and dandy until the tyrants use it to kill off any dissent.
Lets try Liberty and Justice instead. Similar but not quite the same.
And when others do to them, that which they do to others, they cry butthurt tears and crawl as fast as they can to the same people they hated a few minutes ago to save their candyasses. They are the very hypocrites they whine about the most.
You think Hillary can save us? The laws don't apply to her, so we already know where this will go. Tyranny for every American, except the Clinton Crime Family.
But does that explain all the mysterious deaths surrounding Clinton? ;-)
If Blackberry bought something like Discord (or Slack), and integrated it with their corporate support software/systems (BBM for example), it could dominate one area of Smartphones, especially if they figure out how to secure the IM platform with good encryption end to end.
The problem is, that everyone is looking to get into the IM field now, from Google (Allo) to Facebook (Slack/FB for work). Google only has a slight lead, and only because it is huge. FB is such a "no touch" to many corporations that that is going to be a tough sell.
I am not sure how Blackberry could pull this off, but the one thing just about everyone loved was BBM, the problem was keeping it tied to the BB platform relegated it to "I'll give up BBM for better Smartphone (iPhone/Android) with a better ecosystem."
Blackberry thought it was invincible, and it is that hubris that caused it to make a series of really stupid moves over a long period of time. It survived only because it was a behemoth when the first mosquito bit it. It is dying now that it has been all but sucked dry.
I will not miss the tiny buttons on a Blackberry Keyboard. Once I learned to Swype, it was like a dream come true.
And if I can learn to Swype, anyone can. I have a big time small motor control problem with my hands, so typing on screen is only slightly worse than typing on little keyboards. Swype is much easier than trying finger type.
The above is purely my opinion. I am not a financial analyst.
You are absolutely correct. While they are burning money now, they have enough assets to last though this bit of a rough patch. And, if they sell off any patents they don't actually need (Hardware) to someone, they can add to their liquidity.
The fact is, there are plenty of /. "experts" who don't know shit about running a large enterprise business, but think they do. Mom N Pop doesn't scale, and far too many IT people live in that world (and make a good living at it)
Actually, this is more like Hillary saying Lowering Taxes delayed the recovery, and she is going to tax us more, so they can spend more. Because taxing people in a recession is a great way to get us out of recession.