"Oh, sure, we'll fix it for free, but you have to bring it to our repair facility in Tucson. Oh, by the way, our single qualified technician is backlogged six months. If your crops can't wait six months, we do offer a premium value-added repair service that includes same-day onsite repairs..."
Joseph McCarthy already tried all of that and it was a goddamn disaster for obvious reasons. Maybe you should get your head out of your ass. It's time for you to retire from politics and let the adults handle it now.
It is public transit. There is no "wire" being tapped and your conversation is not private. If a person next to you can hear/see — and record — audio/video of your conversation, so can the government.
You should review the laws for both your state and the federal government. I think you are going to be shocked at how wrong you are.
Both state and federal wiretapping laws make no exceptions for "public" or "private" spaces, nor is "expectation of privacy" a relevant facotr as it is with photography.
The term "wiretap" doesn't literally mean "tapping an electronic communication". It refers to the general practice of eavesdropping on a conversation and is explicitly covered by New Jersey state statute N.J. Stat. 2A:156A-3, -4 and 18 U.S. Code 2511.
So, yes, this is specifically covered under both state and federal wiretapping laws and neither of those make an exception for public spaces.
Proof that the local government doesn't care about public safety but they do care about their budgets. Can't make their bottom line without DUI convictions and seized vehicles.
Having used both the Rift and the Vive, I can say that it's no great loss. The Vive is orders of magnitude better. Unfortunately, in the minds of most people, "Oculus" is synonymous with "VR" so the Vive will have to struggle to make its mark. Especially with headsets coming out soon from Sony, et. al.
So, your opinion is that the 0.1 percenter who has done more humanitarian work with his money that you could possibly dream of while you sit behind a keyboard and bitch about it should keep his mouth shut? I think I'd rather have him talk about his projects and why he stands behind his decisions. Honestly, I wish you'd make up your mind. You either want the billionaires to share their riches or you don't. You can't demand that they share and then complain when they do. I don't think he should have to apologize to you because he had a plan that you didn't like.
A watch and a smart watch are two completely different things that serve different roles. While a smartwatch does tell time, that's generally not why people buy them. It's hardly fair to compare the two and then hold up the traditional watch as being superior simply because it never needs software updates.
You're not necessarily wrong, but it's also a defeatist attitude. We should have the right to use modern technology without being surveilled by our own government.
You know, you didn't even have to read the article. You only had to make it to the second sentence of the summary to learn the name. In fact, it's mentioned three times in the summary alone.
If we don't act like "whiny little bitches" about it now, while we still can, then when we really are a police state, it'll be far too late. Excuse us if we'd like to avoid that.
You have the right to bear arms - during an organized revolt, while part of a militia, while fighting against a tyrannical government.
So, you're only allowed to own guns when you're a member of an organized revolt fighting against a tyrannical government. You're literally saying that it's only legal to own a gun during an insurrection. And that makes perfect sense to you? You're honestly sitting here trying to get us to believe that WE'RE the ones incapable of understanding English?
One man's hate speech is another man's opinion. Who are you to judge which is which? That's the entire point of "free speech". It certainly seems like what is being considered "hate speech" in the context of this article has a pretty broad and over-reaching definition.
Prior to 9/11, past hijackings were primarily of the "Take this plane to Havana!" type. People believed that if they complied, they' go home safely. 9/11 changed that forever. When you have no expectation that the plane is going anywhere but into the side of a building, you're not going to sit still and wait for it to happen, pen knife or no penknife. And the handful of incidents since have proven that completely. The passengers will tear a hijacker limb from limb with their bare hands if they have to.
Slashdot Mirror
I bet there's more than one shareholder lawsuit out of this. It suggests that the board was negligent in conducting due diligence.
"Oh, sure, we'll fix it for free, but you have to bring it to our repair facility in Tucson. Oh, by the way, our single qualified technician is backlogged six months. If your crops can't wait six months, we do offer a premium value-added repair service that includes same-day onsite repairs..."
Joseph McCarthy already tried all of that and it was a goddamn disaster for obvious reasons. Maybe you should get your head out of your ass. It's time for you to retire from politics and let the adults handle it now.
"Good news, and the stock is up 12% after hours as a result."
Well...good news except for the 6500 people you just fired. But as long as you got paid, that's all that matters, eh, Mr Investor?
Tripwire (and tripwire-like software such as bit9/Carbon Black) has been a thing for years. What's different about this approach?
It is public transit. There is no "wire" being tapped and your conversation is not private. If a person next to you can hear/see — and record — audio/video of your conversation, so can the government.
You should review the laws for both your state and the federal government. I think you are going to be shocked at how wrong you are.
Both state and federal wiretapping laws make no exceptions for "public" or "private" spaces, nor is "expectation of privacy" a relevant facotr as it is with photography.
The term "wiretap" doesn't literally mean "tapping an electronic communication". It refers to the general practice of eavesdropping on a conversation and is explicitly covered by New Jersey state statute N.J. Stat. 2A:156A-3, -4 and 18 U.S. Code 2511.
So, yes, this is specifically covered under both state and federal wiretapping laws and neither of those make an exception for public spaces.
Why aren't these systems running afoul of both state and federal wiretapping laws?
Proof that the local government doesn't care about public safety but they do care about their budgets. Can't make their bottom line without DUI convictions and seized vehicles.
Having used both the Rift and the Vive, I can say that it's no great loss. The Vive is orders of magnitude better. Unfortunately, in the minds of most people, "Oculus" is synonymous with "VR" so the Vive will have to struggle to make its mark. Especially with headsets coming out soon from Sony, et. al.
So, your opinion is that the 0.1 percenter who has done more humanitarian work with his money that you could possibly dream of while you sit behind a keyboard and bitch about it should keep his mouth shut? I think I'd rather have him talk about his projects and why he stands behind his decisions. Honestly, I wish you'd make up your mind. You either want the billionaires to share their riches or you don't. You can't demand that they share and then complain when they do. I don't think he should have to apologize to you because he had a plan that you didn't like.
A watch and a smart watch are two completely different things that serve different roles. While a smartwatch does tell time, that's generally not why people buy them. It's hardly fair to compare the two and then hold up the traditional watch as being superior simply because it never needs software updates.
You're not necessarily wrong, but it's also a defeatist attitude. We should have the right to use modern technology without being surveilled by our own government.
You know, you didn't even have to read the article. You only had to make it to the second sentence of the summary to learn the name. In fact, it's mentioned three times in the summary alone.
If we don't act like "whiny little bitches" about it now, while we still can, then when we really are a police state, it'll be far too late. Excuse us if we'd like to avoid that.
That's one of the classic blunders. Never get involved in a land war in Asia.
You have the right to bear arms - during an organized revolt, while part of a militia, while fighting against a tyrannical government.
So, you're only allowed to own guns when you're a member of an organized revolt fighting against a tyrannical government. You're literally saying that it's only legal to own a gun during an insurrection. And that makes perfect sense to you? You're honestly sitting here trying to get us to believe that WE'RE the ones incapable of understanding English?
One man's hate speech is another man's opinion. Who are you to judge which is which? That's the entire point of "free speech". It certainly seems like what is being considered "hate speech" in the context of this article has a pretty broad and over-reaching definition.
Nothing encourages a free and open dialogue like stamping out opposing viewpoints.
Do you have any idea how incredibly valuable "metadata" is for signals intelligence?
We can start with mail servers and this ridiculous desire to keep every e-mail from the last twenty years "just in case".
You really think Disney is an innocent bystander? That they don't have full knowledge of what they're doing?
How do you block it with no caller-id?
Prior to 9/11, past hijackings were primarily of the "Take this plane to Havana!" type. People believed that if they complied, they' go home safely. 9/11 changed that forever. When you have no expectation that the plane is going anywhere but into the side of a building, you're not going to sit still and wait for it to happen, pen knife or no penknife. And the handful of incidents since have proven that completely. The passengers will tear a hijacker limb from limb with their bare hands if they have to.