chaperoning her through sensitive areas to inform her to stop filming/delete the video / not post it online for others to see.
Naw.... If the company is seriously concerned about people filming/taking pictures in certain areas, they would do what other companies do that are concerned about these things and have a strong security presence, bringing the guest in would have clear ground rules spelled out on that very day, and they would detect a kid coming in filming things in about 2 seconds, And some random kid wouldn't even get in the building without acknowledging security requirements verbally and signing for a visitor badge.
If they're in places where the general public has access to (No security presence restricting access to employees), then they can't reasonably hold the parent responsible as an employee for their kid having access to that place and filming things there --- now filming the iPhone X is another matter, But "violation" for filming by the kid should require that some sensitive and not already publicly-available knowledge or information was exposed.
Once again, there is no mystery. After the extensive vulnerabilities of the web server were discovered, a plan was made in March based on reccommendations
In other words, they Knew or were responsible for knowing the extensive vulnerabilities could have resulted in a compromise of that server, and they were acting willfully to either knowingly or negligently destroy the forensic evidence and other details of compromises and other civil and criminal violations related to that server, which they had a duty to preserve.
The question is, why isn't someone being charged with evidence tampering?
Apparently, because they are above the law. Becoming presumed guilty and jailed for evidence tampering only happens to normal people like you or I; not public officials like those in charge of elections, or those like Lois Lerner.
If you are in government, then just get the data securely erased and feign ignorance, and you will be fine.
Lawful speech people don't like is still free speech.
Announcing a new policy is fine.... disrupting communities and purging content within hours of the announcement is not. The proper thing is to allow those subs time to modify their rules and require submissions to conform to the new policies or decide to move elsewhere WITH REASONABLE NOTICE, As in 30 days notice, not 5 minutes notice.
Because a quarter to half the population already has their own preconceived idea about what "God" is.
So we can let them have their idea that the influencer is "God", and others could attribute different characteristics to the apparently-sentient influencer; like the concept that our universe is someone's petri dish, and a mad scientist from a different universe made some minor adjustments causing our big bang and physics to work out.
How about if we lower the bar from to Sentient Influence ? Meaning a self-aware or thinking entity's influence caused the universe to come into existence. That allows for the possibility that some or many aspects of it were intelligently designed, and other aspects were emergent characteristics or occured due to probability (Which might or might not have been the primary goal of the Sentient Influencer).
but it should also recognize that 'gay' means something else when others use it.
They probably learned over time that in all likelihood many people who are gay rarely use the word "Gay" online, and very often, perhaps much more often than not, when the word is used it's being used by a bigot, and very rarely do most people write about their own sexual orientation in public in a positive way.
Heck.... usually sexual orientation is in the private domain. How many times do you really see people writing in a public place "I'm heterosexual" or "I'm gay", and which do you think is more likely (or not) to be a troll or sarcasm by some bigot?
Google's got a complex linguistic and cognitive problem there that may be beyond current solution power.
Don't forget charcoal BBQs and fragrant dryer sheets! My nose has rights that trump your freedoms.
The smoke from Charcoal BBQs don't have health issues associated with them like tobacco smoke --- and put outdoors in a well-ventillated location, and you can easily avoid the smoke if you wanted.
Restricting activities is about not letting people involuntarily cause harm to other normal peoples' health; it's not about the sensibilities of someone's nose.
Simply saying "smoking/e-cigars" makes you a liar.
You're spouting nonsense; the two are similar enough fundamentally that the superficial differences do not weigh heavily enough to not combine the two.... it is not particularly important that one is a carbon vapor from burning something and the other has a different composition ---- they both serve ultimately the same purpose which is delivery of drugs at quantity Via the air, they both contain similar trace harmful materials such as formaldehyde; in fact, most likely the Vaping can contain even a higher density, and in that case could be more harmful than even the burning smoke, even if the manufacturers described it as "cleaner", as in more free of particulants ---- there is a bogus assumption there that it is only inhaling particulants that is bad smoke from burning carbon is bad, but it is not all that is unhealthy ---- so they're basically right to categorize vaping as in the same ballpark as smoking.
or an isolated room with its own door, with a fridge/freezer
Just like an attached garage. Maybe all a lot of people will need to do to get that is find a place to cut a normal sized door into their garage, so they can put a smart lock on that while the main garage door stays shut.
Then paint a clearly designated area on the ground where the vehicles park when people get home, and a clearly designated area for packages to be left.
Guy takes home the NSA malware, disables Kaspersky to install some warez and then realizes his machine has been p0wned, so does multiple full scans. The NSA malware is picked up during those scans and automatically submitted for analysis (the default behaviour).
In other words, the Antimalware software did exactly what it should do and is disclosed to its users of doing ---- SAMPLING SUSPICIOUS RUNNING PROGRAM FILES
There's nothing shady about that..... Indeed failing to develop signatures for NSA malware and treat it just like other malware is the greatest concern.
And let's ban caffeine vapors in 2nd-hand caffeine inhalation
Definitely NOT comparable. The aromas from coffee and liquor are highly dilute compared to that of something concentrated like cigarette smoke AND those beverages in the quantities used do not put high concentrations of random chemicals and drugs into a gaseous form ---- you would definitely have to drink some of the product to absorb a detectable quantity of anything.
The gases from smoking/e-cigars when used do involve deliberately putting very high concentrations in the actual air, so much so that the portion of the product that hasn't been burned would likely poison the user if they were to eat it without smoking.
Vapors from products designed to be smoked and have an effect are NOT in the same ballgame as the incidental aroma from beverages designed to be safely drunken.
The hate is people around people who like nicotine have the right to make a personal decision to not use the drug. Fine if you utilize nicotine in a manner that does not expose other people to nicotine vapors.
He will send Hillary to prison, even if it ultimately sends half of DC to prison. We can only hope.
That would be absolutely fabulous for most of DC to go to prison. Trump would have actually accomplished something meaningful for a change, instead of all the time spent on Twitter pissing people off and further enraging the Left and Liberal Fake news outlets such as CNN, Huffingtonpost, etc.
What happened to the government Of the people, For the people, by the people, with the Rule of law and justice and faithful execution over all politics as the commanding principle for all officials and government employees?
We are now probing investigations, because the investigation might have been done improperly.
How long before we have to investigate the investigation of the investigation?
OR how about a probe of the investigation of the investigation of the investigation of the investigation of X.
FINALLY how about an infinitely recursive investigation? We'll do an investigation of A and B, and investigation of the investigation of A and B, and the investigation of all potential investigations that cover A and B.
folks only use these digital currencies as arbitrage for real currency.
That sounds like a broad generalization to me.... i've actually purchased goods and services from vendors using BTC, and it wasn't for arbitrage purposes, but I'm not holding more than $50US worth of BTC either, out of concern that occassionally the digital currency has been so volatile that tomorrow my same amount of BTC could be worth $20 or $90, so the high rate of volatility for conversion is a concern, but otherwise I would be perfectly happy to use it.
BTC would be more ideal if there would be a way to transact in it but peg its value, so that if the USD price per BTC decreases, then my BTC balance automatically increases to correct, or if the USD price per BTC increases, then my BTC balance automatically decreases to reflect the same USD value that I put into it.
So what is this... using DATA fields on different Blockchains to represent the transaction entries of a 3rd kind of currency whose transactions are Encapsulated in the comment field of transaction IDs on other blockchains referenced by records on the Altcoin's own blockchain, or what?
Author writes "AI Talent", then refers to Machine Learning. Machine Learning refers to a few statistical regression techniques that is not what artificial intelligence is about.
Artificial Intelligence is more of a research field, and the concept of human intelligence remains an unsolved problem --- what it sounds like they are really hiring are hard-core Computer Scientists with some experience attacking real-world solution-finding problems like extracting useful intelligence from data, classifying or identifying things, making decisions, or acting in the real-world; that goes outside the bound of AI, because the common goals are to make computers solve real-world problems for business tasks and Not make generally intelligent machines with agency and capabilities similar to a living intelligent being.......
The new employers want you to have one beforehand because it is cheaper to transfer it than have one done up from scratch.
Then they need to either reduce the cost of obtaining or increasing the cost of transfer to make the costs identical for transferring, like they ought to be....
While you're at it, why not wish for a law prohibiting discrimination based on the prospective employee's skill set? The current system reeks of favoritism for people who know how to do things.
No.... discrimination based on having SKILLS or KNOWLEDGE required do the job well is fair and reasonable. For all security clearances say, the entire job description could have been unplugging toilets in a DoD bathroom or handing out fliers and other propaganda at conferences.
Security clearances are entirely artificial and say nothing about qualification to a handle a job; they just say something about working for an employer who had some security compliance requirements and some gov't agency run history and background check on you once.
This whole thing sucks for people who haven't been cleared (Because it's not possible unless you're hired for a job where the government actually requires it) and reeks of favoritism for past governmental employees.
I'd like to see federal legislation passed that either prohibits employment/job discrimination based on the possession at the time of hiring of a government security clearance, OR security clearances are automatically revoked or cancelled when leaving or changing employers and have to be re-verified to be re-instated after hiring to a new job, OR a law prohibiting an individual holding clearances from causing any of the clearances they already hold to be disclosed to a recruiter or prospective employer, other than ability to get a clearance or already having a clearance will have to be verified after a hiring decision.
....Plenty of people were calling the housing bubble a bubble
The people who manage to "find speculative bubbles everywhere" don't really count; for every "housing bubble" they successfully saw, there were 1000 things they saw overpriced or bubbles that never saw any kind of crash.
What you don't see when there's a real bubble is multiple figures recognized by the industry as public calling it out clearly as a bubble and taking the risk to make a concrete prediction about what approximate percentage of a price crash is overdue to below the day's level --- when you have multiple professional analysts saying that kind of thing it means probably the market has taken that into account, and as we know, the markets are loss-averse, so whatever the "bubble" was is likely dead by the time that happens.
Media commentators on CNBC, on the other hand..... they're constantly forecasting crashes whenever prices are going up: even a broke clock is right twice a day, the journalists aren't credible voices even to consider ---- they don't put it on the line and make specific falsifiable predictions or stake their reputation on their record of accuracy of predictions, either.
Do you disagree with the fact that bitcoin is a huge speculative bubble? If so, why?
I disagree Bitcoin is a speculative bubble, and invite you to show material evidence that it is one, or that about $6000 USD per BTC is not about right as a price for this asset.
Usually the MORE the number prominent and influential people you see calling something a bubble; the less-likely it is to be a bubble, or the more likely it is to be limited in size or impact. All the major bubbles that wound up exploding and being serious calamities were NOT widely being called bubbles until after the pop, at least not by popular figures --- For example, the housing bubble and calamotous crash that nobody really predicted, although many people later made non-credible claims of having guessed: you can tell they didn't predict it because they didn't financially bet on it imploding.
Popular figures calling things bubbles causes investors and potential investors to become more apprehensive and cautious..... that's probably the case with some ICOs. I agree that many other ICOs are likely to be scams, but that doesn't necessarily mean the whole system is a bubble.
My suggestion would be that Gun Owners must maintain no less than $500,000 per firearm in liability insurance, double the amount for semi-auto devices; they must pay for the insurance as permanent insurance with an upfront lump sum, and show proof during the purchase transaction --- if a firearm is stolen and misused in a crime, then the registered owner will be liable, and also create liability for compliance issues that insurance will have to cover - reporting as stolen will only reduce liabilty to 50%.
Slashdot Mirror
chaperoning her through sensitive areas to inform her to stop filming/delete the video / not post it online for others to see.
Naw.... If the company is seriously concerned about people filming/taking pictures in certain areas, they would do what other companies do that are concerned about these things and have a strong security presence, bringing the guest in would have clear ground rules spelled out on that very day, and they would detect a kid coming in filming things in about 2 seconds, And some random kid wouldn't even get in the building without acknowledging security requirements verbally and signing for a visitor badge.
If they're in places where the general public has access to (No security presence restricting access to employees), then they can't reasonably hold the parent responsible as an employee for their kid having access to that place and filming things there --- now filming the iPhone X is another matter, But "violation" for filming by the kid should require that some sensitive and not already publicly-available knowledge or information was exposed.
Once again, there is no mystery. After the extensive vulnerabilities of the web server were discovered, a plan was made in March based on reccommendations
In other words, they Knew or were responsible for knowing the extensive vulnerabilities could have resulted in a compromise of that server, and they were acting willfully to either knowingly or negligently destroy the forensic evidence and other details of compromises and other civil and criminal violations related to that server, which they had a duty to preserve.
The question is, why isn't someone being charged with evidence tampering?
Apparently, because they are above the law. Becoming presumed guilty and jailed for evidence tampering only happens to normal people like you or I; not public officials like those in charge of elections, or those like Lois Lerner.
If you are in government, then just get the data securely erased and feign ignorance, and you will be fine.
Lawful speech people don't like is still free speech.
Announcing a new policy is fine.... disrupting communities and purging content within hours of the announcement is not.
The proper thing is to allow those subs time to modify their rules and require submissions to conform to the new policies or
decide to move elsewhere WITH REASONABLE NOTICE, As in 30 days notice, not 5 minutes notice.
Why not just say "God" and be done with it.
Because a quarter to half the population already has their own preconceived idea about what "God" is.
So we can let them have their idea that the influencer is "God", and others could attribute different characteristics
to the apparently-sentient influencer; like the concept that our universe is someone's petri dish, and a mad scientist
from a different universe made some minor adjustments causing our big bang and physics to work out.
How about if we lower the bar from to Sentient Influence ?
Meaning a self-aware or thinking entity's influence caused the universe to come into existence.
That allows for the possibility that some or many aspects of it were intelligently designed, and other
aspects were emergent characteristics or occured due to probability (Which might or might not have
been the primary goal of the Sentient Influencer).
but it should also recognize that 'gay' means something else when others use it.
They probably learned over time that in all likelihood many people who are gay rarely use the word "Gay" online, and very often, perhaps much more often than not, when the word is used it's being used by a bigot, and very rarely do most people write about their own sexual orientation in public in a positive way.
Heck.... usually sexual orientation is in the private domain. How many times do you really see people writing in a public place "I'm heterosexual" or "I'm gay", and which do you think is more likely (or not) to be a troll or sarcasm by some bigot?
Google's got a complex linguistic and cognitive problem there that may be beyond current solution power.
Don't forget charcoal BBQs and fragrant dryer sheets! My nose has rights that trump your freedoms.
The smoke from Charcoal BBQs don't have health issues associated with them like tobacco smoke --- and put outdoors in a well-ventillated location, and you can easily avoid the smoke if you wanted.
Restricting activities is about not letting people involuntarily cause harm to other normal peoples' health; it's not about the sensibilities of someone's nose.
Simply saying "smoking/e-cigars" makes you a liar.
You're spouting nonsense; the two are similar enough fundamentally that the superficial differences do not weigh heavily enough to not combine the two.... it is not particularly important that one is a carbon vapor from burning something and the other has a different composition ---- they both serve ultimately the same purpose which is delivery of drugs at quantity Via the air, they both contain similar trace harmful materials such as formaldehyde;
in fact, most likely the Vaping can contain even a higher density, and in that case could be more harmful than even the burning smoke, even if the manufacturers described it as "cleaner", as in more free of particulants ---- there is a bogus assumption there that it is only inhaling particulants that is bad smoke from burning carbon is bad, but it is not all that is unhealthy ---- so they're basically right to categorize vaping as in the same ballpark as smoking.
or an isolated room with its own door, with a fridge/freezer
Just like an attached garage.
Maybe all a lot of people will need to do to get that is find a place to cut a normal sized door into their garage, so they can put a smart lock on that while the main garage door stays shut.
Then paint a clearly designated area on the ground where the vehicles park when people get home, and a clearly designated area for packages to be left.
Guy takes home the NSA malware, disables Kaspersky to install some warez and then realizes his machine has been p0wned, so does multiple full scans. The NSA malware is picked up during those scans and automatically submitted for analysis (the default behaviour).
In other words, the Antimalware software did exactly what it should do and is disclosed to its users of doing ---- SAMPLING SUSPICIOUS RUNNING PROGRAM FILES
There's nothing shady about that..... Indeed failing to develop signatures for NSA malware and treat it just like other malware is the greatest concern.
And let's ban caffeine vapors in 2nd-hand caffeine inhalation
Definitely NOT comparable. The aromas from coffee and liquor are highly dilute compared to that of something concentrated like cigarette smoke AND those beverages in the quantities used do not put high concentrations of random chemicals and drugs into a gaseous form ---- you would definitely have to drink some of the product to absorb a detectable quantity of anything.
The gases from smoking/e-cigars when used do involve deliberately putting very high concentrations in the actual air, so much so that the portion of the product that hasn't been burned would likely poison the user if they were to eat it without smoking.
Vapors from products designed to be smoked and have an effect are NOT in the same ballgame as the incidental aroma from beverages designed to be safely drunken.
The hate is people around people who like nicotine have the right to make a personal decision to not use the drug.
Fine if you utilize nicotine in a manner that does not expose other people to nicotine vapors.
He will send Hillary to prison, even if it ultimately sends half of DC to prison. We can only hope.
That would be absolutely fabulous for most of DC to go to prison. Trump would have actually accomplished something meaningful for a change, instead of all the time spent on Twitter pissing people off and further enraging the Left and Liberal Fake news outlets such as CNN, Huffingtonpost, etc.
What happened to the government Of the people, For the people, by the people, with the Rule of law and justice and faithful execution over all politics as the commanding principle for all officials and government employees?
We are now probing investigations, because the investigation might have been done improperly.
How long before we have to investigate the investigation of the investigation?
OR how about a probe of the investigation of the investigation of the investigation of the investigation of X.
FINALLY how about an infinitely recursive investigation? We'll do an investigation of A and B, and investigation of the investigation of A and B, and the investigation of all potential investigations that cover A and B.
folks only use these digital currencies as arbitrage for real currency.
That sounds like a broad generalization to me.... i've actually purchased goods and services from vendors using BTC, and
it wasn't for arbitrage purposes, but I'm not holding more than $50US worth of BTC either, out of concern that occassionally
the digital currency has been so volatile that tomorrow my same amount of BTC could be worth $20 or $90,
so the high rate of volatility for conversion is a concern, but otherwise I would be perfectly happy to use it.
BTC would be more ideal if there would be a way to transact in it but peg its value, so that if the USD price per BTC decreases,
then my BTC balance automatically increases to correct, or if the USD price per BTC increases, then my BTC balance automatically decreases to
reflect the same USD value that I put into it.
So what is this... using DATA fields on different Blockchains to represent the transaction entries of a 3rd kind of currency whose transactions are Encapsulated in the comment field of transaction IDs on other blockchains referenced by records on the Altcoin's own blockchain, or what?
Author writes "AI Talent", then refers to Machine Learning.
Machine Learning refers to a few statistical regression techniques that is not what artificial intelligence is about.
Artificial Intelligence is more of a research field, and the concept of human intelligence remains an unsolved problem ---
what it sounds like they are really hiring are hard-core Computer Scientists with some experience attacking real-world solution-finding problems like extracting useful intelligence from data, classifying or identifying things, making decisions, or acting in the real-world; that goes outside the bound of AI, because the common goals are to make computers solve real-world problems for business tasks and Not make generally intelligent machines with agency and capabilities similar to a living intelligent being.......
The new employers want you to have one beforehand because it is cheaper to transfer it than have one done up from scratch.
Then they need to either reduce the cost of obtaining or increasing the cost of transfer to make the costs identical for transferring, like they ought to be....
While you're at it, why not wish for a law prohibiting discrimination based on the prospective employee's skill set? The current system reeks of favoritism for people who know how to do things.
No.... discrimination based on having SKILLS or KNOWLEDGE required do the job well is fair and reasonable.
For all security clearances say, the entire job description could have been unplugging toilets in a DoD bathroom or handing out fliers and other propaganda at conferences.
Security clearances are entirely artificial and say nothing about qualification to a handle a job; they just say
something about working for an employer who had some security compliance requirements and some gov't agency run history and background check on you once.
This whole thing sucks for people who haven't been cleared (Because it's not possible unless you're hired for a job where the government actually requires it) and reeks of favoritism for past governmental employees.
I'd like to see federal legislation passed that either prohibits employment/job discrimination based on the possession at the time of hiring of a government security clearance, OR security clearances are automatically revoked or cancelled when leaving or changing employers and have to be re-verified to be re-instated after hiring to a new job, OR a law prohibiting an individual holding clearances from causing any of the clearances they already hold to be disclosed to a recruiter or prospective employer, other than ability to get a clearance or already having a clearance will have to be verified after a hiring decision.
The people who manage to "find speculative bubbles everywhere" don't really count; for every
"housing bubble" they successfully saw, there were 1000 things they saw overpriced or bubbles that never saw any kind of crash.
What you don't see when there's a real bubble is multiple figures recognized by the industry as public calling it out clearly as a bubble and taking the risk to make a concrete prediction about what approximate percentage of a price crash is overdue to below the day's level --- when you have multiple professional analysts saying that kind of thing it means probably the market has taken that into account, and as we know, the markets are loss-averse, so whatever the "bubble" was is likely dead by the time that happens.
Media commentators on CNBC, on the other hand..... they're constantly forecasting crashes whenever prices are going up: even a broke clock is right twice a day, the journalists aren't credible voices even to consider ---- they don't put it on the line and make specific falsifiable predictions or stake their reputation on their record of accuracy of predictions, either.
Do you disagree with the fact that bitcoin is a huge speculative bubble? If so, why?
I disagree Bitcoin is a speculative bubble, and invite you to show material evidence that it is one, or that about $6000 USD per BTC is not about right as a price for this asset.
Usually the MORE the number prominent and influential people you see calling something a bubble; the less-likely it is to be a bubble, or the more likely it is to be limited in size or impact. All the major bubbles that wound up exploding and being serious calamities were NOT widely being called bubbles until after the pop, at least not by popular figures --- For example, the housing bubble and calamotous crash that nobody really predicted, although many people later made non-credible claims of having guessed: you can tell they didn't predict it because they didn't financially bet on it imploding.
Popular figures calling things bubbles causes investors and potential investors to become more apprehensive and cautious..... that's probably the case with some ICOs. I agree that many other ICOs are likely to be scams, but that doesn't necessarily mean the whole system is a bubble.
My suggestion would be that Gun Owners must maintain no less than $500,000 per firearm in liability insurance, double the amount for semi-auto devices; they must pay for the insurance as permanent insurance with an upfront lump sum, and show proof during the purchase transaction --- if a firearm is stolen and misused in a crime, then the registered owner will be liable, and also create liability for compliance issues that insurance will have to cover - reporting as stolen will only reduce liabilty to 50%.