There is a difference between a background check & giving over your password.
Keep in mind most people use the same password for everything (including online banking), so this is a very dangerous thing to do. Yeah, you can say you'll change the passwords before you get home, but it might already be too late. If you have direct deposit, they'll also have your bank account number, which is your userid with some banks, so, it's not even a stretch to think it could happen. Yeah, it's stupid to use the same password for everything, but it happens.
Asking for a link to your Facebook profile or even requiring you to friend them is one thing (and would have its own share of arguments), but forcing you to give up your password is definitely another matter altogether.
But AT&T can easily tell if your phone is connecting to their towers. It'd be stupid of them to over bill when the phone has been turned off for ten days, but it'd be "smart" of them to use false numbers when the phone is turned on & the data can't be disputed because of "background data/updates".
Also, is the phone set to download emails in the background? Update facebook/twitter? The possibilities are pretty much endless depending on what they installed.
Natural selection hasn't gotten rid of headaches, but an aspirin can.
Yes, most anything involving the brain involves some form of trade-off, but you know what, so does everything else in life. If I eat something that tastes good (or is just convenient), then I most likely trade taste/convenience for massive calories.
If I jog to keep my body in better shape, I run the risk of tripping on something and breaking my leg (or just having a heart attack).
As you said, yes, we do not really understand the brain, but we know that on the whole if we give someone these drugs they cause this effect (in general). If we put a magnet in this place, at this strength, it'll have this effect.
Also, you said that medical tech. is good for fixing things like broken bones? That was also simple trial and error. If we hold the bone this way, it heals better. If we..... it works better, etc... These ideas didn't just happen. It took trial and error (much like all technology AND natural selection).
Is it really too much to ask the/. editors to quickly look around the page for the crud-free one-page "print" version link and post that for us all instead...
So you'd like Slashdot to intentionally screw PCMag out of ad revenue for the (not insignificant) amount of traffic/. brings to their website, making it likely that PCMag's web gurus will block such outside linking to the print version, disable the print version outright, put themselves behind a pay filter, or go out of business (something that plug-ins like AdBlock are already working on doing)?
Yes, no one likes ads. But to quote the snob -- "websites is expensive".
Then the ads shouldn't be so obtrusive. If I can't hover my mouse on the screen without an ad popping up, then it's obtrusive. If I have to scroll through half a page of ads to read the rest of the article, it's a problem.
I have my AdBlock set to allow the google text ads. They don't get in the way & are sometimes useful.
I do agree though, that searching for an adfree version of the page to link to will only result in the site removing that feature completely. Not a good thing for any of us. If you don't want to see the ads, either adblock or find the printable version yourself.
So basically everyone will be forced to upgrade their phones and computers because Google wants to force ANOTHER codec on the web?
People upgrade their equipment every couple of years & when you do, you'd have the full advantage of what is currently available, just like with everything else.
Just like with a BlueRay, you're free to use it or not. Eventually it'll take over DVD or BR will go the way of VHS and be overshadowed by something else (will people then be whining about the money they'll be FORCED to spend to upgrade?)
WebM is almost certainly infringing on patents as well.
Maybe, but the fact of the matter is that people who HAVE paid for the rights to use H.264 HAVE been sued for patent infringement. NO ONE has been sued for using WebM yet and besides, you don't have to pay to use it. If you're going to get sued anyways, you might as well not have paid for the "right"
The user just installs chrome & they're done. I haven't had to install any plugins to get anything to work with chrome. With IE & Firefox I do. It's not hard (at all) to install the codecs, but it definitely does simplify things for the end user & chrome keeps it up to date for me, which is a plus.
I hadn't thought of it that way, but you're most likely 100% correct.
If they can't find a legitimate crime (and even if they can), they'll always have you for something that is completely inconsequential to the issue instead.
Similar to an officer being able to give you a DUI while sleeping in a car that's turned OFF.
I've read that the only way people have managed to get out of the DUI is if they didn't have the keys in the vehicle with them.
$30/year print vs $36/year digital isn't that bad though.
For the GF, I got 3 years of Cosmo for $15 TOTAL. No offense, I'm just not willing to pay more than double what I pay for 3 years for a single year where I don't even get to keep the product in a real sense.
A difference of 50 cents a month I'd consider for the convenience factor, but from what I've read, the digital versions aren't even any more convenient other than portability and people not being able to see what you're reading just by seeing the cover.
With digital formats, you don't even have to worry about grandma not being able to read since it's trivial to just make the font larger.
With a book, you'd have to pay more for a large print edition (and rightfully so, it's using more paper, ink, etc...) and have more than one copy of the book floating around.
Can you imagine a scenario where it would be illegal for a passenger in a car to drink whatever he wanted to? It is only illegal to drive under the influence, but open container laws apply to passengers too.
I can imaging it and it doesn't seem too horrible to me. Really no worse than driving someone home that's drunk. What, is being a DD going to be illegal as well since you can't drive with drunk passengers because you imagine scenarios where all sorts of crazy things happen?
I'd like to imagine that those open container laws are holdovers from before an officer could shove something in your mouth and prove you're drunk.
There was a time when if you smelled drunk, you were drunk & officers didn't want to deal with excuses of "it was in the car, but I wasn't drinking it, I swear!" Now, they can tell if you're drunk or not & in an objective way too.
Those open container laws are stupid because they no longer serve a point.
I notice you're not offering to be the first to "die off like the evolutionary dead end we are."
I'm sorry that things like SUVs don't meet your high standards of aesthetics, but too bad.
You say that they're a sign of the "rich spoiled class" but YOU consider them to be "big and obnoxious and very annoying." You sound a bit like the class you claim to not be a part of.
If you want to make a point, how about you back them up with something more than "I don't like it and I never ever will!"
If other beings "on this plane" wind up not liking the mess we make of the cosmos when we "colonize and pollute it", they can come talk to us then. Since we haven't even managed to colonize our own solar system, I don't think they have anything to worry about for quite some time. Once we do manage to fill up our solar system, it's still more than 4 lightyears to the nearest star, so even if we can achieve instantaneous light speed AND instantaneous braking, we'll STILL be 4 years away from the nearest star! IIRC, our sun is also the closest star to Alpha Centauri, so we'll still be AT LEAST 4 light years away from getting anywhere else (most likely more, but playing on the low end of the scale, it's still at least 4 years)!
1)You don't "accidentally" retain sniffed traffic logs of that size, across your entire international operations, for months if not years, "accidentally." See http://gizmodo.com/5671049/google-street-view-cars-collected-emails-and-passwords I mean come on...someone would have noticed the drives filling up, wondered why, etc. These people are supposedly geniuses, right?
2)There's no political grandstanding here. This is a major privacy invasion. The "grandstanding" has been international, because people are PISSED. Google collected and correlated with location data...MAC addresses and IPs of base stations and client devices. Email addresses. Passwords. URLs. I'm going to be VERY generous and assume that they only captured the sniffed traffic, and not that they intentionally extracted all that from traffic and only stored the extracted data, because that would have been even more obviously-intentional.
3)It's slightly creepy when you go around wardriving. When an international corporation which has a always demonstrated an intense interest in profiling its users and mining its users data for advertising purposes, does it, across the planet? That's just slightly different.
1. Why not? If everything that touched that data from then on was all automated systems that are told to read the first 15 bytes (or whatever), then a red flag might never have gotten raised over the data being too big.
Hell, on MY hard drives, I have data that I intended to delete 4 years ago still floating around. I'm not a giant corporation, I'm just a person who happened to find a bunch of music videos that I was interested in years ago that were supposed to have long since been deleted (they are now), so why is it beyond the realm of possibility that a large corporation wouldn't be able to overlook the exact same data? I mean, I'm sure this data is insignificant in size when compared to the images they were storing at the same time.
2. They are "grandstanding' because (in the US at least), NO LAWS WERE BROKEN! The government wants to confiscate data that was unencrypted in public space from a private company when no laws were broken! If they want this damn data so bad, they can go collect it themselves from the source!
3. Many routers give the option to lower the strength of the signal. You can lower it (trial and error) if you wanted to the point that the signal doesn't leave your house, OR just realize that when you are sending unencrypted data OTA, you have to realize that it's NOT private! Its not hard to fix the issue, all you have to do is encrypt the data on the router. If you do that, it's a crime to decrypt and the entire issue becomes relevant.
But, this is an issue that is "simply dispatched" by turning on the encryption options like it TELLS YOU TO in the manual of every single wireless router I have ever seen!
I suspect more would be happy to serve on jury duty if they got paid the judge's salary to sit there.
While I don't discount that that is true, do you really think most jurors are WORTH the same salary as a judge? I mean, the judge is a judge for a reason: He is qualified to be one.
I do whole heartedly agree that jurors should be making more than they do now (~$40/day for a federal juror according to google).
As the old joke goes, it's sad that if you're ever tried for a crime, the people who hold your fate in their hands are the only ones stupid enough to not get out of jury duty.
It's really not hard to get out of jury duty if you don't want to do it, just say you hate some racial group & you'll pretty much immediately not be considered. Say you were a history major in school and you'll be gone. Say that you... do you see where I'm going with this? It's really not hard, if you don't want to have the "priviledge" of jury duty, then you can get out of it in any number of ways.
Its Exchange server is forced to play ball with mobile devices running Android and iOS, instead of pulling a fast one with obscure proprietary protocols. And now it is claiming Google does not "get" corporations? Shows how sorely Microsoft does not "get" google.
Whats worse IMHO is that M$ releases WP7 without full exchange support. I mean, it's sad that both Android and iOS can do a better job than a M$ OS! Talk about not getting corporations.
Their stance is that WP7 is a consumer device. Well, you know what, so is the iPhone and a lot of companies have them as their company phone.
Wow, so their explanation of why they won't hear the case is based on the fact that she saw the copyright notice on the CD that she doesn't have?
That's almost as bad as an EULA INSIDE the product you by and if you don't agree with it, you can't return the product since you've opened it.
Only a very, very small subset of geeks use Windows "because they have to." Most of the population believes that Windows == "computer." So, they see Windows Phone 7 and will probably think "I bet this will hook up to my computer easily since it's the same thing as my computer."
Please don't think I'm a shill for MS. I use OS X, Windows, and Linux for different tasks and I realize all three are tools that have pros and cons. However, I think denying that the Windows brand is extremely powerful to the general population is delusional.
I dunno, people use whatever was on their computer when they bought it. They use Windows because they have to. Most people don't upgrade the OS ever.
The only time people really notice the OS is when something doesn't work (the latest awesome screensaver that's going around the office or whatever).
Slashdot Mirror
The children wouldn't have to actually type anything, but just hit the enter key to send it.
There is a difference between a background check & giving over your password.
Keep in mind most people use the same password for everything (including online banking), so this is a very dangerous thing to do. Yeah, you can say you'll change the passwords before you get home, but it might already be too late. If you have direct deposit, they'll also have your bank account number, which is your userid with some banks, so, it's not even a stretch to think it could happen. Yeah, it's stupid to use the same password for everything, but it happens.
Asking for a link to your Facebook profile or even requiring you to friend them is one thing (and would have its own share of arguments), but forcing you to give up your password is definitely another matter altogether.
But AT&T can easily tell if your phone is connecting to their towers. It'd be stupid of them to over bill when the phone has been turned off for ten days, but it'd be "smart" of them to use false numbers when the phone is turned on & the data can't be disputed because of "background data/updates".
Bad analogy, this would be like getting a speeding ticket when you had the car turned on in the driveway.
Also, is the phone set to download emails in the background? Update facebook/twitter? The possibilities are pretty much endless depending on what they installed.
Natural selection hasn't gotten rid of headaches, but an aspirin can.
..... it works better, etc... These ideas didn't just happen. It took trial and error (much like all technology AND natural selection).
Yes, most anything involving the brain involves some form of trade-off, but you know what, so does everything else in life. If I eat something that tastes good (or is just convenient), then I most likely trade taste/convenience for massive calories.
If I jog to keep my body in better shape, I run the risk of tripping on something and breaking my leg (or just having a heart attack).
As you said, yes, we do not really understand the brain, but we know that on the whole if we give someone these drugs they cause this effect (in general). If we put a magnet in this place, at this strength, it'll have this effect. Also, you said that medical tech. is good for fixing things like broken bones? That was also simple trial and error. If we hold the bone this way, it heals better. If we
Agreed. A good editor will still be necessary, but a publisher as a whole is not really needed (especially for authors that are already well known).
Is it really too much to ask the /. editors to quickly look around the page for the crud-free one-page "print" version link and post that for us all instead...
http://www.pcmag.com/print_article2/0,1217,a=259387,00.asp?hidPrint=true
So you'd like Slashdot to intentionally screw PCMag out of ad revenue for the (not insignificant) amount of traffic /. brings to their website, making it likely that PCMag's web gurus will block such outside linking to the print version, disable the print version outright, put themselves behind a pay filter, or go out of business (something that plug-ins like AdBlock are already working on doing)?
Yes, no one likes ads. But to quote the snob -- "websites is expensive".
Then the ads shouldn't be so obtrusive. If I can't hover my mouse on the screen without an ad popping up, then it's obtrusive. If I have to scroll through half a page of ads to read the rest of the article, it's a problem.
I have my AdBlock set to allow the google text ads. They don't get in the way & are sometimes useful.
I do agree though, that searching for an adfree version of the page to link to will only result in the site removing that feature completely. Not a good thing for any of us. If you don't want to see the ads, either adblock or find the printable version yourself.
So basically everyone will be forced to upgrade their phones and computers because Google wants to force ANOTHER codec on the web?
People upgrade their equipment every couple of years & when you do, you'd have the full advantage of what is currently available, just like with everything else.
Just like with a BlueRay, you're free to use it or not. Eventually it'll take over DVD or BR will go the way of VHS and be overshadowed by something else (will people then be whining about the money they'll be FORCED to spend to upgrade?)
WebM is almost certainly infringing on patents as well.
Maybe, but the fact of the matter is that people who HAVE paid for the rights to use H.264 HAVE been sued for patent infringement. NO ONE has been sued for using WebM yet and besides, you don't have to pay to use it. If you're going to get sued anyways, you might as well not have paid for the "right"
Because it's easier for their users.
The user just installs chrome & they're done. I haven't had to install any plugins to get anything to work with chrome. With IE & Firefox I do. It's not hard (at all) to install the codecs, but it definitely does simplify things for the end user & chrome keeps it up to date for me, which is a plus.
I hadn't thought of it that way, but you're most likely 100% correct.
If they can't find a legitimate crime (and even if they can), they'll always have you for something that is completely inconsequential to the issue instead.
Similar to an officer being able to give you a DUI while sleeping in a car that's turned OFF.
I've read that the only way people have managed to get out of the DUI is if they didn't have the keys in the vehicle with them.
you mean other than that stuff called DNA?
A puddle of my blood has human DNA, should it be classified as a full human as well?
$30/year print vs $36/year digital isn't that bad though.
For the GF, I got 3 years of Cosmo for $15 TOTAL. No offense, I'm just not willing to pay more than double what I pay for 3 years for a single year where I don't even get to keep the product in a real sense.
A difference of 50 cents a month I'd consider for the convenience factor, but from what I've read, the digital versions aren't even any more convenient other than portability and people not being able to see what you're reading just by seeing the cover.
Completely agree.
With digital formats, you don't even have to worry about grandma not being able to read since it's trivial to just make the font larger. With a book, you'd have to pay more for a large print edition (and rightfully so, it's using more paper, ink, etc...) and have more than one copy of the book floating around.
Can you imagine a scenario where it would be illegal for a passenger in a car to drink whatever he wanted to? It is only illegal to drive under the influence, but open container laws apply to passengers too.
I can imaging it and it doesn't seem too horrible to me. Really no worse than driving someone home that's drunk. What, is being a DD going to be illegal as well since you can't drive with drunk passengers because you imagine scenarios where all sorts of crazy things happen?
I'd like to imagine that those open container laws are holdovers from before an officer could shove something in your mouth and prove you're drunk.
There was a time when if you smelled drunk, you were drunk & officers didn't want to deal with excuses of "it was in the car, but I wasn't drinking it, I swear!" Now, they can tell if you're drunk or not & in an objective way too.
Those open container laws are stupid because they no longer serve a point.
I notice you're not offering to be the first to "die off like the evolutionary dead end we are."
I'm sorry that things like SUVs don't meet your high standards of aesthetics, but too bad.
You say that they're a sign of the "rich spoiled class" but YOU consider them to be "big and obnoxious and very annoying." You sound a bit like the class you claim to not be a part of.
If you want to make a point, how about you back them up with something more than "I don't like it and I never ever will!"
If other beings "on this plane" wind up not liking the mess we make of the cosmos when we "colonize and pollute it", they can come talk to us then. Since we haven't even managed to colonize our own solar system, I don't think they have anything to worry about for quite some time. Once we do manage to fill up our solar system, it's still more than 4 lightyears to the nearest star, so even if we can achieve instantaneous light speed AND instantaneous braking, we'll STILL be 4 years away from the nearest star! IIRC, our sun is also the closest star to Alpha Centauri, so we'll still be AT LEAST 4 light years away from getting anywhere else (most likely more, but playing on the low end of the scale, it's still at least 4 years)!
1)You don't "accidentally" retain sniffed traffic logs of that size, across your entire international operations, for months if not years, "accidentally." See http://gizmodo.com/5671049/google-street-view-cars-collected-emails-and-passwords I mean come on...someone would have noticed the drives filling up, wondered why, etc. These people are supposedly geniuses, right?
2)There's no political grandstanding here. This is a major privacy invasion. The "grandstanding" has been international, because people are PISSED. Google collected and correlated with location data...MAC addresses and IPs of base stations and client devices. Email addresses. Passwords. URLs. I'm going to be VERY generous and assume that they only captured the sniffed traffic, and not that they intentionally extracted all that from traffic and only stored the extracted data, because that would have been even more obviously-intentional.
3)It's slightly creepy when you go around wardriving. When an international corporation which has a always demonstrated an intense interest in profiling its users and mining its users data for advertising purposes, does it, across the planet? That's just slightly different.
1. Why not? If everything that touched that data from then on was all automated systems that are told to read the first 15 bytes (or whatever), then a red flag might never have gotten raised over the data being too big.
Hell, on MY hard drives, I have data that I intended to delete 4 years ago still floating around. I'm not a giant corporation, I'm just a person who happened to find a bunch of music videos that I was interested in years ago that were supposed to have long since been deleted (they are now), so why is it beyond the realm of possibility that a large corporation wouldn't be able to overlook the exact same data? I mean, I'm sure this data is insignificant in size when compared to the images they were storing at the same time.
2. They are "grandstanding' because (in the US at least), NO LAWS WERE BROKEN! The government wants to confiscate data that was unencrypted in public space from a private company when no laws were broken! If they want this damn data so bad, they can go collect it themselves from the source!
3. Many routers give the option to lower the strength of the signal. You can lower it (trial and error) if you wanted to the point that the signal doesn't leave your house, OR just realize that when you are sending unencrypted data OTA, you have to realize that it's NOT private! Its not hard to fix the issue, all you have to do is encrypt the data on the router. If you do that, it's a crime to decrypt and the entire issue becomes relevant.
But, this is an issue that is "simply dispatched" by turning on the encryption options like it TELLS YOU TO in the manual of every single wireless router I have ever seen!
Who remembers phone numbers anymore? All my numbers are in my phones address book.
I suspect more would be happy to serve on jury duty if they got paid the judge's salary to sit there.
While I don't discount that that is true, do you really think most jurors are WORTH the same salary as a judge? I mean, the judge is a judge for a reason: He is qualified to be one.
I do whole heartedly agree that jurors should be making more than they do now (~$40/day for a federal juror according to google).
As the old joke goes, it's sad that if you're ever tried for a crime, the people who hold your fate in their hands are the only ones stupid enough to not get out of jury duty.
... do you see where I'm going with this? It's really not hard, if you don't want to have the "priviledge" of jury duty, then you can get out of it in any number of ways.
It's really not hard to get out of jury duty if you don't want to do it, just say you hate some racial group & you'll pretty much immediately not be considered. Say you were a history major in school and you'll be gone. Say that you
Its Exchange server is forced to play ball with mobile devices running Android and iOS, instead of pulling a fast one with obscure proprietary protocols. And now it is claiming Google does not "get" corporations? Shows how sorely Microsoft does not "get" google.
Whats worse IMHO is that M$ releases WP7 without full exchange support. I mean, it's sad that both Android and iOS can do a better job than a M$ OS! Talk about not getting corporations.
Their stance is that WP7 is a consumer device. Well, you know what, so is the iPhone and a lot of companies have them as their company phone.
Wow, so their explanation of why they won't hear the case is based on the fact that she saw the copyright notice on the CD that she doesn't have? That's almost as bad as an EULA INSIDE the product you by and if you don't agree with it, you can't return the product since you've opened it.
Only a very, very small subset of geeks use Windows "because they have to." Most of the population believes that Windows == "computer." So, they see Windows Phone 7 and will probably think "I bet this will hook up to my computer easily since it's the same thing as my computer." Please don't think I'm a shill for MS. I use OS X, Windows, and Linux for different tasks and I realize all three are tools that have pros and cons. However, I think denying that the Windows brand is extremely powerful to the general population is delusional.
I dunno, people use whatever was on their computer when they bought it. They use Windows because they have to. Most people don't upgrade the OS ever.
The only time people really notice the OS is when something doesn't work (the latest awesome screensaver that's going around the office or whatever).