As government leaders in the postwar era held a then-common belief that women shouldn't be allowed into higher-paid professions with long-term prospects because they would leave as soon as they were married.
Before you can claim it as merely a "then-common" belief that women might leave as soon as they were married, you FIRST need to prove it wrong. What data is available, and what does the data for that time period say about a majority of Women staying in and remaining committed or LEAVING professions in general after getting married?
For all I know at that time that WAS then the norm for women to be expected to change their priorities and leave profession after having kids, AND all of that perceived stuff might have been fully justified. That MIGHT even be the norm today that the Man or the Woman might abandon their field following marriage+kids, and then it could be reasonably regarded to maintain a STABLE profession to seek the character and type of candidates that are most likely to be COMMITTED and not leave, for instance; single people who will sign an agreement that they won't date or marry for 10, 20 years, Etc. Etc.
I bet it would be easier for Google to come up with a tool to help us Root our Android OS? It seems that Google has been getting very vindictive lately
You don't need this sort of tool to Root Android; rooting Android is easy and can be done by the end user, by design. As the article points out... this tool is a product of Google's Project Zero researchers, not the teams who work on Android; these security researchers are part of Google's pro-active cyber defenses and do good for the security of ALL vendors' devices and software --- the group is essentially the opposite or counter to organizations such as the NSA that engage similar teams to find and build exploits with the intention of weaponizing them --- instead, Google shares exploits with the affected vendors and then responsibly discloses, instead of keeping vulnerabilities found secret, and their many notable discoveries make the internet a safer place.
Google seems to be taking competition across the board so units that are not in competition are not playing fairly
What exactly are you trying to infer here? Google releasing a security research tool is not an unfair, illegal, or anti-Apple act.
But handling more orders means that others handle less orders, because there's only a limited amount of customers
That's not true. There are a limited number of POTENTIAL customers, but increasing restaurant sales is not a zero-sum game between competitors -- not 100% of potential customers are going to a different restaurant without the automated ordering and higher efficiency; Many will do the next best thing which is to do something like make their own sandwich at home and bring it to work.
On Nov. 12, someone moved almost 25,000 bitcoins, worth about $159 million at the time, to an online exchange.
Mostly; the online exchanges just aren't equipped to handle massive volumes, as we witnessed Coinbase crashing. If they REALLY wanted to unload such a massive amount, rather than simple trading...... the most efficient way to get the most bang for their $, would likely be to find a large buyer directly ---- for example, sell 25,000 BTC to a major bank or investment firm at a small discount to the exchange price, rather than trying to dump it on the exchange, and getting a lot less $$$, because the price goes down on the exchange the more units you sell, and before you know it the buyer-demand is exhausted and short term price is less than you want to sell for.
My boy pointed out that the likely outcome from such a complaint would be a complete electronics ban, rather than a relaxation of the new rule.
So you formulate the complaint clearly that banning even more electronic learning tools is not an acceptable resolution. A 'complete' electronics ban is not very realistic, or would likely cause even more complaints + parents coming at the school with torches and pitchforks + more people pulling out of the school. One way you get bad rules killed by either getting many people to object to the rule to the authority responsible, or escalate to a higher authority for a change of the rule or to REMOVE/REPLACE the person responsible for the ban plus Shame/Villify on social media, etc.
I suspect describing it as a gray area was enough to set off alarm bells for him in the first place. He's had a very strong bent towards Lawful ever since he was 2 or 3.
Well, there is such a thing as undecided law. You would say there are certain exceptions to the law that apply for some specific situations and uses of the work which your legal advisors are aware of that are beyond the comprehension of a 10-year-old.
A child deciding to be "rigid" and pretend as if they're expert on the law doesn't mean you're actually being outsmarted. Even if the propaganda made by the publishers would probably agree with this position.
the pointed out copyright law really isn't on par with the civil rights movement.
That's just an opinion that derives from current culture and common beliefs.
Using a 3rd party to break a digital access restriction is just as much civil disobedience.
100 years ago, or even at the time the movement started the proposition for "civil rights" to the general public would have been considered so unimportant they wouldn't be on-par with your right of ownership and resale or re-use/re-read rights to the book you bought
---- It's the result of acts of civil disobedience and movements using that tool that affects the Law AND the cultural norms.
as there is no way the true final price after the pop will be anywhere near 17,000.
Why? The true final price could be 100K. To make such bold claim as 'final' price will not be near 17K, you need a prediction. If you have a prediction, then the value of it is based on how well you can explain your prediction based on true info you've analyzed.
It doesn't make sense to buy so little that the amount you get is dwarfed by whatever the fees are. Minimum buy is a POLICY of whatever service you are using AND your own good sense to buy at least enough that you have a useful transaction that the fees aren't a significant fraction of.
So he tried to go on his schools online library app. He checked it out just fine, but ironically, the offline reading function only works on the now-disallowed iPads.
Well, that is totally unreasonable and there might even be some legal cause of action there. That ONE kind of eBook-reader should be disallowed but not another that was previously allowed. Time to contact someone who can do things at the school, make the complaint, and such, Or pull the kid from that school and send them somewhere that doesn't have a Luddite administration.
I tried to explain format shifting, and the injustice of the current copyright framework in America. Even when he did his own research, stumbling across EFF's website on fair use, he still would not believe me.
Arguing that you feel the current legal framework is unfair is not the way to make someone believe you, now is it?
Well, Technically it is a gray area. If you own the print copy of the book you can use a version that someone else scanned or converted to PDF and gave to you, and it's likely claimable fair use for you to use the extra copy for your own personal usage only ---- Any person who uploaded or shared the bootleg version probably did something illegal, but not you.
My suggestion would be to get advice from an attorney.... then you can tell your kid "Copyright law has some complicated exceptions called fair use, and only a professional lawyer is qualified to fully advise on a defensible position for certain actions; Upon the advise from my lawyer I am legally in the clear (or not) to download and use a bootleg copy of the same book I already purchased for my own personal use, as long as I don't further redistribute, share it, or copy it.".
As bitcoin grows, the math problems computers must solve to make more bitcoin (a process called "mining") get more and more difficult
Sorry.... the article contains an outright lie, and an outright deception that traditional Banking networks don't have energy costs. The mining problem does not become more complicated or require more computing power "As bitcoin grows" (Or because) ----- the difficulty of mining scales with the available hashrate, and the current hashrate is AMPLE for the needs of the network. Instead there's an Incentive for miners to stand up additional compute as the VALUE of 1 BTC increases relative to their costs of energy.
The hashrate thus the required compute stops growing when it becomes non-profitable to turn up new mining operations due to competition. In other words: the hashrate of BTC does not grow indefinitely ---- it's totally bogus to attribute a specific amount of energy to a transaction, the mining growth reaches a plateau when standing up more miners is no longer profitable, and increase in the number of transactions in BTC would not mean that electricity usage skyrockets.
The increase in mining observed is not because Bitcoin grows among people using and transacting in it, but when MINING becomes more profitable due to the dynamics of BTC value and energy prices --- in the long run the reward from mining will drop.
You in the XXX organization of government have no right to use official resources to ask third parties to do things that go against our interests.
Congress hasn't passed an act directing you to "ask" companies to embed concealed defects into their products that you sell to the people, therefore, you doing so is an ABUSE.
Now if your directors of departments want crypto backdoors in YOUR OWN GOODS that you buy for the use by that government department from those same companies, that's a different matter entirely; that's the ONLY kind of product design influence you should have on any private-sector individual or company.
I think we have overestimated the "value" of data we hand over. It's valuable to marketers because of supply and demand and a perception of cost savings involved with Targeting Ads, BUT this is Google/Facebook using data to solve a problem created by Google/Facebook.
There's a very good chance that the "value of data" on people is really an artificial Bubble, and the value of data per person will go to 0 as it becomes more and more widely available.
However, I'm pretty sure no Chinese person has ever thought of Chinese characters as "kanji".
They are not.. the characters are not Kanji to the Chinese; I am just saying we can overlook the obvious error and see what the poster meant....
People vaguely familiar to the situation should be very familiar with the fact that the Kanji is the uniquely-Japanese writing system that uses the shared Chinese ideograms, and it's the set of Ideograms not the local adaptation called Kanji or the language that are shared.
Imagine Step 2.... they could intend to get a rival gang member in prison on some petty charge, and instead of reducing the number of years, increase them, add a "no parole" restriction, or make a false "death penalty" addendum to their file.
The codes are only for use by the owner of the disc. You cannot rent, borrow, or covertly steal a code from a friend. You must be the owner of the physical disc.
Says who? Maybe I bought the disk and refused to agree to any such restriction. A product purchased at retail is mine, AND I have the right to re-sell anything i've purchased in whole or in part.
A retailer or manufacturer cannot legally bundle items together and prevent me from dividing the bundle and reselling --- that is, unless they make me commit to the terms prior to the sale.
first handful of 5G home subscribers will have a similar experience until 5G smartphones become popular.
So in exchange for being fixed endpoints and not allowed to move; give the 5G home users priority on the network and apply all the restrictions and throttling to the actual smartphones. Because of the additional capacity 5G provides it should be fine providing they build out their networks adequately.
Cryptographers like the meteorologists screaming STOP --- Clouds are these formations of moisture and dust in the sky, they have NOTHING to do with hosting, and Cloud Computing is one of the most obscene utterances ever. Too late.... too late.
Most cretins that would do that sort of nonsense on a plane aren't smart enough to think of that.
Assuming the cretin was even on the plane.... the cretin might have been on the ground or up in a broadcast tower with a strong WiFi signal, and people on the plane started picking up the remote AP as they went by.
I doubt there would be "major legal consequences." Cancelling a pilot's planned vacation probably isn't going to ruin their life.
They have no ability to do that. The pilot will simply refuse the airline's attempt to cancel their vacation, and the airline will still be obligated to pay the pilot based on their contract.
They made an agreement, and now they need to back out of it due to their own fault
A contract is a contract, agreement + promise.. You don't get to back out of those, not without a major reputation hit for failing to keep your word and major legal consequences, anyways.
They'll either need to cancel those flights, find more pilots, or entice some pilots to come to a new agreement; probably by offering a huge chunk of change and bidding up that amount until they find pilots willing to accept that much $$$ to switch their vacation time around.
There should be an upper limit to the amount of employees corporations can have.
Actually... The more employees you hire the better, and a perverse incentive to encourage mass layoffs and more automation would be a bad idea. I would say there should be an upper limit to the number of Customers or Users and daily revenue.
The limits need to be agreed upon by the entire world though, and span international boundaries, AND all "Affiliate/Subsidiary" arrangements.
You forgot Amazon and Microsoft. Amazon has cornered the cloud computing market soon to be retail and EVERYTHING, and Microsoft still has the desktop OS market cornered.
Slashdot Mirror
As government leaders in the postwar era held a then-common belief that women shouldn't be allowed into higher-paid professions with long-term prospects because they would leave as soon as they were married.
Before you can claim it as merely a "then-common" belief that women might leave as soon as they were married, you FIRST need to prove it wrong.
What data is available, and what does the data for that time period say about a majority of Women staying in and remaining committed or LEAVING professions in general after getting married?
For all I know at that time that WAS then the norm for women to be expected to change their priorities and leave profession after having kids, AND all of that perceived stuff might have been fully justified.
That MIGHT even be the norm today that the Man or the Woman might abandon their field following marriage+kids, and then it could be reasonably regarded to maintain a STABLE profession to seek the character and type of candidates that are most likely to be COMMITTED and not leave, for instance; single people who will sign an agreement that they won't date or marry for 10, 20 years, Etc. Etc.
I bet it would be easier for Google to come up with a tool to help us Root our Android OS?
It seems that Google has been getting very vindictive lately
You don't need this sort of tool to Root Android; rooting Android is easy and can be done by the end user, by design.
As the article points out... this tool is a product of Google's Project Zero researchers, not the teams who work on Android; these security researchers are part of Google's pro-active cyber defenses and do good for the security of ALL vendors' devices and software --- the group is essentially the opposite or counter to organizations such as the NSA that engage similar teams to find and build exploits with the intention of weaponizing them --- instead, Google shares exploits with the affected vendors and then responsibly discloses, instead of keeping vulnerabilities found secret, and their many notable discoveries make the internet a safer place.
Google seems to be taking competition across the board so units that are not in competition are not playing fairly
What exactly are you trying to infer here? Google releasing a security research tool is not an unfair, illegal, or anti-Apple act.
But handling more orders means that others handle less orders, because there's only a limited amount of customers
That's not true. There are a limited number of POTENTIAL customers, but increasing restaurant sales is not a zero-sum game between competitors -- not 100% of potential customers are going to a different restaurant without the automated ordering and higher efficiency; Many will do the next best thing which is to do something like make their own sandwich at home and bring it to work.
On Nov. 12, someone moved almost 25,000 bitcoins, worth about $159 million at the time, to an online exchange.
Mostly; the online exchanges just aren't equipped to handle massive volumes, as we witnessed Coinbase crashing. If they REALLY wanted to unload such a massive amount, rather than simple trading...... the most efficient way to get the most bang for their $, would likely be to find a large buyer directly ---- for example, sell 25,000 BTC to a major bank or investment firm at a small discount to the exchange price, rather than trying to dump it on the exchange, and getting a lot less $$$, because the price goes down on the exchange the more units you sell, and before you know it the buyer-demand is exhausted and short term price is less than you want to sell for.
My boy pointed out that the likely outcome from such a complaint would be a complete electronics ban, rather than a relaxation of the new rule.
So you formulate the complaint clearly that banning even more electronic learning tools is not an acceptable resolution. A 'complete' electronics ban is not very realistic, or would likely cause even more complaints + parents coming at the school with torches and pitchforks + more people pulling out of the school. One way you get bad rules killed by either getting many people to object to the rule to the authority responsible, or escalate to a higher authority for a change of the rule or to REMOVE/REPLACE the person responsible for the ban plus Shame/Villify on social media, etc.
I suspect describing it as a gray area was enough to set off alarm bells for him in the first place. He's had a very strong bent towards Lawful ever since he was 2 or 3.
Well, there is such a thing as undecided law. You would say there are certain exceptions to the law that apply for some specific situations and uses of the work which your legal advisors are aware of that are beyond the comprehension of a 10-year-old.
A child deciding to be "rigid" and pretend as if they're expert on the law doesn't mean you're actually being outsmarted.
Even if the propaganda made by the publishers would probably agree with this position.
the pointed out copyright law really isn't on par with the civil rights movement.
That's just an opinion that derives from current culture and common beliefs.
Using a 3rd party to break a digital access restriction is just as much civil disobedience.
100 years ago, or even at the time the movement started the proposition for "civil rights" to the general public would have been considered so unimportant they wouldn't be on-par with your right of ownership and resale or re-use/re-read rights to the book you bought
---- It's the result of acts of civil disobedience and movements using that tool that affects the Law AND the cultural norms.
Of course that is true, but knowing it WILL crash means at this point you are simply gambling if you choose to get in.
No... It just means that in your opinion, apparently, it is a risky gamble.
as there is no way the true final price after the pop will be anywhere near 17,000.
Why? The true final price could be 100K. To make such bold claim as 'final' price will not be near 17K,
you need a prediction. If you have a prediction, then the value of it is based on how well you can explain your prediction based on true info you've analyzed.
It doesn't make sense to buy so little that the amount you get is dwarfed by whatever the fees are.
Minimum buy is a POLICY of whatever service you are using AND your own good sense to
buy at least enough that you have a useful transaction that the fees aren't a significant fraction of.
So he tried to go on his schools online library app. He checked it out just fine, but ironically, the offline reading function only works on the now-disallowed iPads.
Well, that is totally unreasonable and there might even be some legal cause of action there. That ONE kind of eBook-reader should be disallowed but not another that was previously allowed. Time to contact someone who can do things at the school, make the complaint, and such, Or pull the kid from that school and send them somewhere that doesn't have a Luddite administration.
I tried to explain format shifting, and the injustice of the current copyright framework in America. Even when he did his own research, stumbling across EFF's website on fair use, he still would not believe me.
Arguing that you feel the current legal framework is unfair is not the way to make someone believe you, now is it?
Well, Technically it is a gray area. If you own the print copy of the book you can use a version that someone else scanned or converted to PDF and gave to you, and it's likely claimable fair use for you to use the extra copy for your own personal usage only ---- Any person who uploaded or shared the bootleg version probably did something illegal, but not you.
My suggestion would be to get advice from an attorney.... then you can tell your kid "Copyright law has some complicated exceptions called fair use, and only a professional lawyer is qualified to fully advise on a defensible position for certain actions; Upon the advise from my lawyer I am legally in the clear (or not) to download and use a bootleg copy of the same book I already purchased for my own personal use, as long as I don't further redistribute, share it, or copy it.".
As bitcoin grows, the math problems computers must solve to make more bitcoin (a process called "mining") get more and more difficult
Sorry.... the article contains an outright lie, and an outright deception that traditional Banking networks don't have energy costs. The mining problem does not become more complicated or require more computing power "As bitcoin grows" (Or because) ----- the difficulty of mining scales with the available hashrate, and the current hashrate is AMPLE for the needs of the network. Instead there's an Incentive for miners to stand up additional compute as the VALUE of 1 BTC increases relative to their costs of energy.
The hashrate thus the required compute stops growing when it becomes non-profitable to turn up new mining operations due to competition. In other words: the hashrate of BTC does not grow indefinitely ---- it's totally bogus to attribute a specific amount of energy to a transaction, the mining growth reaches a plateau when standing up more miners is no longer profitable, and increase in the number of transactions in BTC would not mean that electricity usage skyrockets.
The increase in mining observed is not because Bitcoin grows among people using and transacting in it, but when MINING becomes more profitable due to the dynamics of BTC value and energy prices --- in the long run the reward from mining will drop.
You in the XXX organization of government have no right to use official resources to ask third parties to do things that go against our interests.
Congress hasn't passed an act directing you to "ask" companies to embed concealed defects into their products that you sell to the people, therefore, you doing so is an ABUSE.
Now if your directors of departments want crypto backdoors in YOUR OWN GOODS that you buy for the use by that government department from those same companies, that's a different matter entirely; that's the ONLY kind of product design influence you should have on any private-sector individual or company.
I think we have overestimated the "value" of data we hand over. It's valuable to marketers because of supply and demand and a perception of cost savings involved with Targeting Ads, BUT this is Google/Facebook using data to solve a problem created by Google/Facebook.
There's a very good chance that the "value of data" on people is really an artificial Bubble, and the value of data per person will go to 0 as it becomes more and more widely available.
However, I'm pretty sure no Chinese person has ever thought of Chinese characters as "kanji".
They are not.. the characters are not Kanji to the Chinese; I am just saying we can overlook the obvious error and see what the poster meant....
People vaguely familiar to the situation should be very familiar with the fact that the Kanji is the uniquely-Japanese writing system that uses the shared Chinese ideograms, and it's the set of Ideograms not the local adaptation called Kanji or the language that are shared.
Imagine Step 2.... they could intend to get a rival gang member in prison on some petty charge, and instead of reducing the number of years, increase them, add a "no parole" restriction, or make a false "death penalty" addendum to their file.
hànzì, and they're used by the Chinese, the Japanese adapted them to kanji () , Koreans as Hanja (), the Vietnemese, and some others.
No... ICANN is an independent organization of its own. The UN doesn't "own" other organizations.
The codes are only for use by the owner of the disc. You cannot rent, borrow, or covertly steal a code from a friend. You must be the owner of the physical disc.
Says who? Maybe I bought the disk and refused to agree to any such restriction.
A product purchased at retail is mine, AND I have the right to re-sell anything i've purchased in whole or in part.
A retailer or manufacturer cannot legally bundle items together and prevent me from dividing the bundle and reselling --- that is, unless they make me commit to the terms prior to the sale.
first handful of 5G home subscribers will have a similar experience until 5G smartphones become popular.
So in exchange for being fixed endpoints and not allowed to move; give the 5G home users priority on the network and apply all the restrictions and throttling to the actual smartphones. Because of the additional capacity 5G provides it should be fine providing they build out their networks adequately.
It is the reverse: you don't need to be an experienced electrician to know, but being an experienced electrician means you most certainly know.
Do you? Electricians work on electrical wiring, they're not EM experts. It would be different if he was Electrical Engineer.
Cryptographers like the meteorologists screaming STOP --- Clouds are these formations of moisture and dust in the sky, they have NOTHING to do with hosting, and Cloud Computing is one of the most obscene utterances ever. Too late.... too late.
Most cretins that would do that sort of nonsense on a plane aren't smart enough to think of that.
Assuming the cretin was even on the plane.... the cretin might have been on the ground or up in a broadcast tower with a strong WiFi signal,
and people on the plane started picking up the remote AP as they went by.
I doubt there would be "major legal consequences." Cancelling a pilot's planned vacation probably isn't going to ruin their life.
They have no ability to do that. The pilot will simply refuse the airline's attempt to cancel their vacation,
and the airline will still be obligated to pay the pilot based on their contract.
They made an agreement, and now they need to back out of it due to their own fault
A contract is a contract, agreement + promise.. You don't get to back out of those, not without a major reputation hit for failing to keep your word and major legal consequences, anyways.
They'll either need to cancel those flights, find more pilots, or entice some pilots to come to a new agreement;
probably by offering a huge chunk of change and bidding up that amount until they find pilots willing to accept that much $$$ to switch their vacation time around.
There should be an upper limit to the amount of employees corporations can have.
Actually... The more employees you hire the better, and a perverse incentive to encourage mass layoffs and
more automation would be a bad idea.
I would say there should be an upper limit to the number of Customers or Users and daily revenue.
The limits need to be agreed upon by the entire world though, and span international boundaries, AND all "Affiliate/Subsidiary" arrangements.
You forgot Amazon and Microsoft.
Amazon has cornered the cloud computing market soon to be retail and EVERYTHING, and Microsoft still has the desktop OS market cornered.