The thing is, Slack is easily reproducible by any other company or open source software. Its just a fancy IRC after all, there are hundreds of similar tools you can install yourself, right now. They just made it easy and cheap, and made a sales pitch to business clients which made it reasonable to use.
Luckily, whenever wall street screws it up and/or hikes the prices, it will take about one week to build/install an adequate replacement and migrate your team to that. Since it is primarily used by small teams, it would be super easy to migrate your entire team to a replacement, unlike the challenge of say, migrating your family and friends away from Facebook.
He was arrested for lying to investigators about his communications to members of Trumps campaign. The topic of the communications that he lied about, was wikileaks.
So if you absolutely want to split hairs:
"FBI Arrests Trump Associate Roger Stone Over His Communications With WikiLeaks" is not quite accurate
"FBI Arrests Trump Associate Roger Stone Over His Communications ABOUT WikiLeaks" would fix the semantics.
Do advertisers have an inherent right to know the location of the device I am using (and by extension, me), when I specifically want to keep that information private?
Putting ads on billboards, or tv networks may be annoying, but targeted ads are:
* collecting information about me against my will, even when I use numerous methods to try to block them
* using that information to attempt to manipulate my behavior
Good and evil are relative terms, but I consider the majority of the industry to be outright "evil".
Thats the first thing that popped in my head too. The same exact process is used to justify high frequency trading bots as being a necessary part of stock exchanges. Will this bill outlaw HFT?
Or is the government proposing that middle class consumers are entitled to protections when buying toys and shoes, but are NOT allowed the same protections if they want to buy financial assets?
Facebook claims the vast majority (86%) of its total business is performed by 6% of its employees that just so happen to be based in Ireland. Facebook Ireland uses a basic double Irish tax structure to pay effective tax rates of less than 1% on the Irish business.
This means they are effectively only taxing 14% of their business.
Just to clarify, I do NOT think their actions are reasonable. I think it's a horrible invasion of privacy, and absolutely object to it being a requirement, and don't want it to spread to other companies. However, the colloquial phrase "none of their business", doesn't apply in this case. It IS their business- in the sense that they make profits and losses and business choices, based on this data. It, quite literally, is their business model.
P.S. You are complaining that parent didn't read, but then made up the word reasonable, which I never ever said....
As much as I hate their policy, I have to disagree with your point that it isn't their business what you do in private. They are selling you life insurance, and thus could lose money based upon your bad choices. It is in fact directly within their business model to care about what you do in private, that is the basis of their business.
Suddenly these Irish companies pretend to care about America, the land that gave them everything to start their business. America is also the country they refuse to pay their fair share of taxes to, and the country who's political dysfunction they knowingly and intentionally made worse, while profiting by selling propaganda to their own userbase, purchased by foreign enemies. Spare me your crocodile tears. They only care that they got caught, since it puts their profits at risk to face additional regulation.
maybe we should start arresting criminals -- you know, like in every other part of life -- instead of trying to make consumers play their own game of cops and robbers every minute of every day.
I live in the inner city of a high crime city. Anytime I walk outside, I have to pay attention, since there are dangers lurking nearby. I don't expect the police to make everything totally safe, nor would I want to live in the kind of absolute police state environment that it would require. Similarly, I don't want a "totally safe" internet, where all content is curated and carefully vetted.
A lot of people are salary exempt and get paid a fixed amount every week, whether they work 20 hours that week, or 60. There isn't always a direct connection between 1 hour of work = 1 hour of pay.
We've been spending years on this site talking about AI, the increasing automation of jobs, subjects like universal income as a solution to the coming wave of unemployment, and the future of what "work" will become, and you choose to blame Obama for not just the impact of technology, but also blame him for baby boomers reaching retirement age? That seems a little unfair...
You also like to cut n splice clips of Obama debating himself, but seem to be ignoring the times that Trump contradicts himself on an almost daily basis, sometimes in the same run-on sentence!
I think the courts have been pretty consistent that inciting panic (shouting "fire") and inciting violence do not qualify as free speech, and aren't under the same level of protections. Media companies are reacting in a somewhat reasonable manner in trying to curb and remove the calls for violence that Alex Jones keeps issuing on their platforms. It just so happens that most of the requests for violence are coming from right-wing talking heads. I'd HOPE for the same kind of response if left-wing talking heads kept calling for violence towards their political opponents.
I'm sure there are plenty of counterexamples, but pro-gun groups & people are much more consistent about using guns as their solution when compared to the anti-gun crowd for instance.
But...
What if he carries an iphone?
What if he left his phone at home, rather than bring a tracking device to the scene of a crime he is committing?
What if he uses burner / disposable phones?
What if he has access to, and carries the phone of somebody he doesn't like? An ip address isn't a person, and similarly, a phone isn't a person.
How many times does a story like this need to be news, before criminals decide to turn off their phones and remove the sim before committing a crime? I'm all for cops being able to do their jobs, but this is an overly broad warrant, a fishing expedition at its very core, which is specifically not allowed.
(Of course as a counterpoint to all of the above, we have examples every day of criminals recording their crimes with their personal phones and posting it online.)
Are you alleging that Apple knowingly and intentionally made a misleading or false material statement about their finances and assets? Isn't that a crime for a public company?
I'd actually say that we are in agreement. In this case, the people engaged in corruption and violence ARE the eeeevil rich people, who own and control the resources. And they are the ones letting people starve. Maybe you can call them the localized 1%, keeping so many resources to themselves that other people die. The facts remain- people starve every day, yet there is enough food on the planet, and it just isn't reaching them due to greed.
For those people, the original statement holds true- "the reason a given person isn't prosperous, is because someone else is"
Strictly speaking, we have enough food in the world to feed everyone. Yet, every single day, all over the earth, people starve to death. Ultimately, the reason anyone starves, is because somebody else in the world, owns that food, and is unwilling to give their food / hard work / "money", to the people who are starving.
That's not to disagree that the majority of people are not better off than at any previous time in history. But, there continue to be people so poor that they die, solely because the people who do have the resources and wealth to keep them alive, don't share.
I have mixed feelings on the idea. On the one hand, the reviews are useful, and many of them provide a basic synopsis and rough idea of whether I might like the film, without having to go to IMDB and look something up. On the other hand, my viewing history and the ratings I have directly given films, are going to be much more relevant to the suggestions they give me.
My wife complains that my suggested watchlist is populated by cheesy low-budget science fiction... This makes sense, because I keep watching that type of content. The vast majority of people would rank these type of films as 1-2 stars out of 5, but that doesn't mean they should simply delete the 1 star content. Those films have enough of an audience to get made, so they need to match movies with their audiences, and ignore if they aren't the critics top choices.
Both the legality, and wisdom, of the weaponization of space need further scrutiny. Even minor weapons tests pose the risk of scattering debris into orbit for hundreds of years, potentially putting the ISS along with a good chunk of communications satellites at severe risk, and possibly hindering all future space travel.
Defense contractors get a new global arms race to cash in on, while we get to look forward to the loss of GPS and all other space based communications.
I expect Trump to step in personally, and reverse these sanctions, just like he did to all previous anti-Russian actions. He is Vladimirs stooge. The only way the sanctions would remain in place is if these oligarchs are political enemies of Putin.
Their project has to do with analyzing drone footage to provide information to humans more quickly.
What exactly do you think I meant by "target selection"?
Hell, the target selection is the hard part. Adding in the last bit of code to fire a missile or drop a bomb at a given target is relatively simple stuff that we've had for 50+ years.
The employees are objecting to Google being a service to the defense of the country (at Google's profit).
Which country? Google is a multi-national corporation, with headquarters in Dublin, with employees based in dozens of different countries. Many of their employees of all nationalities, and many of their customers of all nationalities, object to the idea of teaching machines to hunt and kill humans, even when it is abstracted to simply "target selection" (for now).
Why is Intel naming all of their new memory products Optane? Near as I can tell, Optane might refer to their m2 chip extension of SRT to boost mechanical drives, or might be a couple different lines of super fast SSD, or might be a dimm now? Somebody needs to talk to their branding & marketing dept, to stop calling everything the same name. It really makes looking up the specs confusing.
Isn't Facebook an Irish company, like so many other big corps who park their corporate HQ there, to avoid paying their fair share of taxes? I guess that makes them a Euro company....
Some people enjoy going for a sunday drive, or sightseeing, or engaging in various, entirely optional, automobile trips, purely for their own personal enjoyment. This activity is dangerous, and tens of thousands of people die every year on the roads. Should they be banned from driving?
There are very few people who believe smoking is completely safe, nearly everyone makes a choice between their personal gain versus their comfort level with the risks involved... just like driving.
Slashdot Mirror
The thing is, Slack is easily reproducible by any other company or open source software. Its just a fancy IRC after all, there are hundreds of similar tools you can install yourself, right now. They just made it easy and cheap, and made a sales pitch to business clients which made it reasonable to use.
Luckily, whenever wall street screws it up and/or hikes the prices, it will take about one week to build/install an adequate replacement and migrate your team to that. Since it is primarily used by small teams, it would be super easy to migrate your entire team to a replacement, unlike the challenge of say, migrating your family and friends away from Facebook.
He was arrested for lying to investigators about his communications to members of Trumps campaign. The topic of the communications that he lied about, was wikileaks.
So if you absolutely want to split hairs:
"FBI Arrests Trump Associate Roger Stone Over His Communications With WikiLeaks" is not quite accurate
"FBI Arrests Trump Associate Roger Stone Over His Communications ABOUT WikiLeaks" would fix the semantics.
Do advertisers have an inherent right to know the location of the device I am using (and by extension, me), when I specifically want to keep that information private?
Putting ads on billboards, or tv networks may be annoying, but targeted ads are:
* collecting information about me against my will, even when I use numerous methods to try to block them
* using that information to attempt to manipulate my behavior
Good and evil are relative terms, but I consider the majority of the industry to be outright "evil".
Thats the first thing that popped in my head too. The same exact process is used to justify high frequency trading bots as being a necessary part of stock exchanges. Will this bill outlaw HFT?
Or is the government proposing that middle class consumers are entitled to protections when buying toys and shoes, but are NOT allowed the same protections if they want to buy financial assets?
Facebook claims the vast majority (86%) of its total business is performed by 6% of its employees that just so happen to be based in Ireland. Facebook Ireland uses a basic double Irish tax structure to pay effective tax rates of less than 1% on the Irish business.
This means they are effectively only taxing 14% of their business.
Just to clarify, I do NOT think their actions are reasonable. I think it's a horrible invasion of privacy, and absolutely object to it being a requirement, and don't want it to spread to other companies. However, the colloquial phrase "none of their business", doesn't apply in this case. It IS their business- in the sense that they make profits and losses and business choices, based on this data. It, quite literally, is their business model.
P.S. You are complaining that parent didn't read, but then made up the word reasonable, which I never ever said....
As much as I hate their policy, I have to disagree with your point that it isn't their business what you do in private. They are selling you life insurance, and thus could lose money based upon your bad choices. It is in fact directly within their business model to care about what you do in private, that is the basis of their business.
Suddenly these Irish companies pretend to care about America, the land that gave them everything to start their business. America is also the country they refuse to pay their fair share of taxes to, and the country who's political dysfunction they knowingly and intentionally made worse, while profiting by selling propaganda to their own userbase, purchased by foreign enemies. Spare me your crocodile tears. They only care that they got caught, since it puts their profits at risk to face additional regulation.
maybe we should start arresting criminals -- you know, like in every other part of life -- instead of trying to make consumers play their own game of cops and robbers every minute of every day.
I live in the inner city of a high crime city. Anytime I walk outside, I have to pay attention, since there are dangers lurking nearby. I don't expect the police to make everything totally safe, nor would I want to live in the kind of absolute police state environment that it would require. Similarly, I don't want a "totally safe" internet, where all content is curated and carefully vetted.
A lot of people are salary exempt and get paid a fixed amount every week, whether they work 20 hours that week, or 60. There isn't always a direct connection between 1 hour of work = 1 hour of pay.
We've been spending years on this site talking about AI, the increasing automation of jobs, subjects like universal income as a solution to the coming wave of unemployment, and the future of what "work" will become, and you choose to blame Obama for not just the impact of technology, but also blame him for baby boomers reaching retirement age? That seems a little unfair...
You also like to cut n splice clips of Obama debating himself, but seem to be ignoring the times that Trump contradicts himself on an almost daily basis, sometimes in the same run-on sentence!
I think the courts have been pretty consistent that inciting panic (shouting "fire") and inciting violence do not qualify as free speech, and aren't under the same level of protections. Media companies are reacting in a somewhat reasonable manner in trying to curb and remove the calls for violence that Alex Jones keeps issuing on their platforms. It just so happens that most of the requests for violence are coming from right-wing talking heads. I'd HOPE for the same kind of response if left-wing talking heads kept calling for violence towards their political opponents.
I'm sure there are plenty of counterexamples, but pro-gun groups & people are much more consistent about using guns as their solution when compared to the anti-gun crowd for instance.
But...
What if he carries an iphone?
What if he left his phone at home, rather than bring a tracking device to the scene of a crime he is committing?
What if he uses burner / disposable phones?
What if he has access to, and carries the phone of somebody he doesn't like? An ip address isn't a person, and similarly, a phone isn't a person.
How many times does a story like this need to be news, before criminals decide to turn off their phones and remove the sim before committing a crime? I'm all for cops being able to do their jobs, but this is an overly broad warrant, a fishing expedition at its very core, which is specifically not allowed.
(Of course as a counterpoint to all of the above, we have examples every day of criminals recording their crimes with their personal phones and posting it online.)
Are you alleging that Apple knowingly and intentionally made a misleading or false material statement about their finances and assets? Isn't that a crime for a public company?
I'd actually say that we are in agreement. In this case, the people engaged in corruption and violence ARE the eeeevil rich people, who own and control the resources. And they are the ones letting people starve. Maybe you can call them the localized 1%, keeping so many resources to themselves that other people die. The facts remain- people starve every day, yet there is enough food on the planet, and it just isn't reaching them due to greed.
For those people, the original statement holds true- "the reason a given person isn't prosperous, is because someone else is"
Strictly speaking, we have enough food in the world to feed everyone. Yet, every single day, all over the earth, people starve to death. Ultimately, the reason anyone starves, is because somebody else in the world, owns that food, and is unwilling to give their food / hard work / "money", to the people who are starving.
That's not to disagree that the majority of people are not better off than at any previous time in history. But, there continue to be people so poor that they die, solely because the people who do have the resources and wealth to keep them alive, don't share.
I have mixed feelings on the idea. On the one hand, the reviews are useful, and many of them provide a basic synopsis and rough idea of whether I might like the film, without having to go to IMDB and look something up. On the other hand, my viewing history and the ratings I have directly given films, are going to be much more relevant to the suggestions they give me.
My wife complains that my suggested watchlist is populated by cheesy low-budget science fiction... This makes sense, because I keep watching that type of content. The vast majority of people would rank these type of films as 1-2 stars out of 5, but that doesn't mean they should simply delete the 1 star content. Those films have enough of an audience to get made, so they need to match movies with their audiences, and ignore if they aren't the critics top choices.
How about we arrest the driver for watching TV while they were supposed to be operating a multi-ton piece of machinery?
Both the legality, and wisdom, of the weaponization of space need further scrutiny. Even minor weapons tests pose the risk of scattering debris into orbit for hundreds of years, potentially putting the ISS along with a good chunk of communications satellites at severe risk, and possibly hindering all future space travel.
Defense contractors get a new global arms race to cash in on, while we get to look forward to the loss of GPS and all other space based communications.
I expect Trump to step in personally, and reverse these sanctions, just like he did to all previous anti-Russian actions. He is Vladimirs stooge. The only way the sanctions would remain in place is if these oligarchs are political enemies of Putin.
Their project has to do with analyzing drone footage to provide information to humans more quickly.
What exactly do you think I meant by "target selection"?
Hell, the target selection is the hard part. Adding in the last bit of code to fire a missile or drop a bomb at a given target is relatively simple stuff that we've had for 50+ years.
The employees are objecting to Google being a service to the defense of the country (at Google's profit).
Which country? Google is a multi-national corporation, with headquarters in Dublin, with employees based in dozens of different countries. Many of their employees of all nationalities, and many of their customers of all nationalities, object to the idea of teaching machines to hunt and kill humans, even when it is abstracted to simply "target selection" (for now).
Why is Intel naming all of their new memory products Optane? Near as I can tell, Optane might refer to their m2 chip extension of SRT to boost mechanical drives, or might be a couple different lines of super fast SSD, or might be a dimm now? Somebody needs to talk to their branding & marketing dept, to stop calling everything the same name. It really makes looking up the specs confusing.
Isn't Facebook an Irish company, like so many other big corps who park their corporate HQ there, to avoid paying their fair share of taxes? I guess that makes them a Euro company....
Some people enjoy going for a sunday drive, or sightseeing, or engaging in various, entirely optional, automobile trips, purely for their own personal enjoyment. This activity is dangerous, and tens of thousands of people die every year on the roads. Should they be banned from driving?
There are very few people who believe smoking is completely safe, nearly everyone makes a choice between their personal gain versus their comfort level with the risks involved... just like driving.