Right. It's basically everyone. Which means that my risk relative to everyone else hasn't really changed. Except maybe for those people who are being diligent and putting credit freezes on their accounts.
What's that you say? The profits from all these new credit freeze fees are going to dwarf any sanctions imposed by federal regulators? Hmmmm.
Unless the feds force Equifax to provide *free* credit freezes to all affected parties for a number of years, and perhaps forces them to pay the going rate for freezes at the other agencies on behalf of the consumer, then this whole thing is like "heads, I win, tails, you lose".
Really? The insurance company just pays out all the time and never denies a claim coming from a seller or processor? And they never raise the rates on the policy? Does the insurance company have a magic goose out back or something?
Not quite. The more credit is available, and the cheaper it is (or feels like it is), then the more people will spend on credit and drive up prices. I say feels like it is because the way credit cards allow minimum payments can trick you into feeling like it's a cheap loan when it's not.
In the US would raise the hackles of religious people who think being forced to go through a government owned/operated central bank is like being forced to do business with the antichrist. Seriously. 40% of the US population believes in creationism. The Social Security Administration will not produce SSNs starting with 666 (https://www.ssa.gov/kc/SSAFactSheet--IssuingSSNs.pdf).
No centralization? What do you call a "state-backed ID card"?
Your proposed system has no practical advantage over the US system. Especially since major loans like mortgages do require additional verification beyond a credit report or credit score. The US system is extremely convenient for smaller loans.
And under your system, all that documentation is going to be scanned and put into computers anyway, right? So what's to prevent hackers from getting this same data out of major lenders systems the way they got it from Equifax? If a company the size of Equifax can't get it right, how do you know your decentralized system of lenders is getting it right?
If that doesn't work, perhaps a law stating that the person who is the subject of a credit check gets to designate which credit reporting agency is to be used by their potential creditors.
Since the title of this Slashdot post is the only place "enjoy" occurs, the authors of the study probably didn't have to pretend anything. And since this is Slashdot, I doubt the change in focus from retention to enjoyment is anything other than a mistake.
Not only that, the headline misleadingly uses the word "enjoy", but the study clearly looked at memory/understanding of the show, not enjoyment. So all they REALLY showed was that memories created during a 6 hour binge are not as lasting as those created over multiple exposures. In fact, what this study shows is more relevant to learning than to anything to do with enjoyment of tv shows. If you have a critical test the next day, binge learning is possible and will hold well for 24 hours... but if you need to actually remember the material at a time after the test, you need to constantly review the material.
If we MUST know how this study applies to TV shows, then what we learn is that binge watching a "season" of an annually released show will make it harder to follow the subsequent season because you've forgotten a lot. But that's what "Previously on [this show]..." recaps are for... and it would be helpful to study how well people did on these tests when shown a recap like that.
There are people who can't learn lots of things... but any college graduate can probably learn to do the bulk of what passes for programming in the places I've worked. And I've seen lots of shitty development from people with CSci degrees (sometimes even Master's), who presumably had to pass a course in college where pointers were covered.
Vendors who sell through Amazon need to accept this type of thing is a risk. Amazon is not now, and never was, an impartial marketplace. It was a big deal when Amazon allowed in used books, cds, and movies, after all, because that might undercut their existing business model. And unlike other large retailers who stock house brands alongside name brands, Amazon itself is a name brand for an increasing array of goods and services. Yes, there are markets that Amazon is not directly involved in, like eclipse glasses, but they've never been a pure middleman. Just the opposite, they've been opening up over the years.
And to be argumentative, I can't think of a single area where Amazon is a monopoly, except for "free" two-day shipping. The closest they come is electronic books and readers. Their streaming music and video services have a number of very strong competitors. Amazon's devices are good, but hardly the only options available (in fact, their tablets are very much a "you get what you pay for" experience).
No. This is what we get when a large marketplace is too easily filled with knock-off goods by less than reputable sellers. As a buyer, I think Amazon should be as aggressive as possible in preventing counterfeits, especially when the counterfeits are basically hijacking the legitimate listings making it much more difficult to sort out which prices are for what. Over at eBay, where each item/seller is its own listing, this isn't a problem. I can confidently buy fakes at a vastly discounted price knowing that is what I'm doing. My last experience trying to sell on Amazon, I was trying to resell some DVDs I'd actually bought through Amazon, yet was denied the listing because of the risk of counterfeits. The aggravating part of that wasn't so much that Amazon was being safe, but that my legit goods wouldn't stand a chance against the fakes on eBay.
You put way too much way stock in someone having a PhD from Harvard. Any idiot would have known what a dumb idea writing this manifesto was, especially given its overall tone. So if he's so fuckin' smart he woulda known better, unless his real goal was to stir shit up and get his fool ass fired.
I blame Google for providing an internal discussion forum that allowed this piece of writing to be widely disseminated prior to a large internal audience without any sort of review process. I mean, what could possibly go wrong?
You must have a huge credit line or extremely small competitors or both. And surely sellers have some right to cancel an order before fulfillment, no? Only a fool would let an inventory-clearing sale to a single address go through on credit like that.
Because when they aren't on a wifi connection, phones tend to be slow in the data transfer department. Because your phone isn't a desktop browser, it's a device with its own constraints and capabilities. Because marketing marketing marketing.
Actually, one would think hardware in line with DSLRs that indulged in these "shenanigans" would result in even better photos than the iPhone. If I just wanted a simple mechanical device that worked in high definition, I'd use a 4x5 film camera and get a decent film scanner. And the 4x5 can do things I haven't heard of people doing with SLRs of any kind... like tilt the focal plane relative to the image plane to allow for a narrow depth of field along a subject that is not parallel to the image plane.
So you're saying there isn't going to be much interest my Instagram account full of pictures of frozen pizzas, hot pockets, and Taco Bell takeout. Crap!
Front-facing vs. "private" emails... and expecting that to prevent this sort of thing is security through obscurity. Even the private addresses would probably follow a pattern or be discoverable by some relatively benign process. As to any objection like "these people don't have time for all this email": I would guess a lot of these people have all too much downtime available for checking emails when they are flying around the world, waiting for meetings to start, etc, especially since the devices necessary to do this stuff now fit in your pocket and can connect to the network from almost everywhere. And since they are often extreme narcissists and the like, of course they are going to want to connect with their fellow power hungry weirdos.
Slashdot Mirror
Right. It's basically everyone. Which means that my risk relative to everyone else hasn't really changed. Except maybe for those people who are being diligent and putting credit freezes on their accounts.
What's that you say? The profits from all these new credit freeze fees are going to dwarf any sanctions imposed by federal regulators? Hmmmm.
Unless the feds force Equifax to provide *free* credit freezes to all affected parties for a number of years, and perhaps forces them to pay the going rate for freezes at the other agencies on behalf of the consumer, then this whole thing is like "heads, I win, tails, you lose".
Really? The insurance company just pays out all the time and never denies a claim coming from a seller or processor? And they never raise the rates on the policy? Does the insurance company have a magic goose out back or something?
Since the breach happened at Equifax, it would be utterly bizarre if a lawsuit made Experian go out of business.
Not quite. The more credit is available, and the cheaper it is (or feels like it is), then the more people will spend on credit and drive up prices. I say feels like it is because the way credit cards allow minimum payments can trick you into feeling like it's a cheap loan when it's not.
1. I was born and raised in the United States.
2. Shut up moron.
In the US would raise the hackles of religious people who think being forced to go through a government owned/operated central bank is like being forced to do business with the antichrist. Seriously. 40% of the US population believes in creationism. The Social Security Administration will not produce SSNs starting with 666 (https://www.ssa.gov/kc/SSAFactSheet--IssuingSSNs.pdf).
No centralization? What do you call a "state-backed ID card"?
Your proposed system has no practical advantage over the US system. Especially since major loans like mortgages do require additional verification beyond a credit report or credit score. The US system is extremely convenient for smaller loans.
And under your system, all that documentation is going to be scanned and put into computers anyway, right? So what's to prevent hackers from getting this same data out of major lenders systems the way they got it from Equifax? If a company the size of Equifax can't get it right, how do you know your decentralized system of lenders is getting it right?
If that doesn't work, perhaps a law stating that the person who is the subject of a credit check gets to designate which credit reporting agency is to be used by their potential creditors.
More porn and cat GIFs on the internet? That's like saying, "if only the universe were larger!"
Whoops. Read TFA then found the original study and it sure is damning on the enjoyment factor with the binge watchers. As reported.
Since the title of this Slashdot post is the only place "enjoy" occurs, the authors of the study probably didn't have to pretend anything. And since this is Slashdot, I doubt the change in focus from retention to enjoyment is anything other than a mistake.
Not only that, the headline misleadingly uses the word "enjoy", but the study clearly looked at memory/understanding of the show, not enjoyment. So all they REALLY showed was that memories created during a 6 hour binge are not as lasting as those created over multiple exposures. In fact, what this study shows is more relevant to learning than to anything to do with enjoyment of tv shows. If you have a critical test the next day, binge learning is possible and will hold well for 24 hours... but if you need to actually remember the material at a time after the test, you need to constantly review the material.
If we MUST know how this study applies to TV shows, then what we learn is that binge watching a "season" of an annually released show will make it harder to follow the subsequent season because you've forgotten a lot. But that's what "Previously on [this show]..." recaps are for... and it would be helpful to study how well people did on these tests when shown a recap like that.
If you're working two full-time jobs, maybe you should stop wasting money on soda and beer and drink tap water?
There are people who can't learn lots of things... but any college graduate can probably learn to do the bulk of what passes for programming in the places I've worked. And I've seen lots of shitty development from people with CSci degrees (sometimes even Master's), who presumably had to pass a course in college where pointers were covered.
Vendors who sell through Amazon need to accept this type of thing is a risk. Amazon is not now, and never was, an impartial marketplace. It was a big deal when Amazon allowed in used books, cds, and movies, after all, because that might undercut their existing business model. And unlike other large retailers who stock house brands alongside name brands, Amazon itself is a name brand for an increasing array of goods and services. Yes, there are markets that Amazon is not directly involved in, like eclipse glasses, but they've never been a pure middleman. Just the opposite, they've been opening up over the years.
And to be argumentative, I can't think of a single area where Amazon is a monopoly, except for "free" two-day shipping. The closest they come is electronic books and readers. Their streaming music and video services have a number of very strong competitors. Amazon's devices are good, but hardly the only options available (in fact, their tablets are very much a "you get what you pay for" experience).
No. This is what we get when a large marketplace is too easily filled with knock-off goods by less than reputable sellers. As a buyer, I think Amazon should be as aggressive as possible in preventing counterfeits, especially when the counterfeits are basically hijacking the legitimate listings making it much more difficult to sort out which prices are for what. Over at eBay, where each item/seller is its own listing, this isn't a problem. I can confidently buy fakes at a vastly discounted price knowing that is what I'm doing. My last experience trying to sell on Amazon, I was trying to resell some DVDs I'd actually bought through Amazon, yet was denied the listing because of the risk of counterfeits. The aggravating part of that wasn't so much that Amazon was being safe, but that my legit goods wouldn't stand a chance against the fakes on eBay.
You put way too much way stock in someone having a PhD from Harvard. Any idiot would have known what a dumb idea writing this manifesto was, especially given its overall tone. So if he's so fuckin' smart he woulda known better, unless his real goal was to stir shit up and get his fool ass fired.
I blame Google for providing an internal discussion forum that allowed this piece of writing to be widely disseminated prior to a large internal audience without any sort of review process. I mean, what could possibly go wrong?
You must have a huge credit line or extremely small competitors or both. And surely sellers have some right to cancel an order before fulfillment, no? Only a fool would let an inventory-clearing sale to a single address go through on credit like that.
Thank you. Thank Medium link made my day.
Because when they aren't on a wifi connection, phones tend to be slow in the data transfer department. Because your phone isn't a desktop browser, it's a device with its own constraints and capabilities. Because marketing marketing marketing.
Actually, one would think hardware in line with DSLRs that indulged in these "shenanigans" would result in even better photos than the iPhone. If I just wanted a simple mechanical device that worked in high definition, I'd use a 4x5 film camera and get a decent film scanner. And the 4x5 can do things I haven't heard of people doing with SLRs of any kind... like tilt the focal plane relative to the image plane to allow for a narrow depth of field along a subject that is not parallel to the image plane.
So you're saying there isn't going to be much interest my Instagram account full of pictures of frozen pizzas, hot pockets, and Taco Bell takeout. Crap!
That's what private key servers are for, and nothing is stopping the feds from setting one up for their own people to use.
Front-facing vs. "private" emails... and expecting that to prevent this sort of thing is security through obscurity. Even the private addresses would probably follow a pattern or be discoverable by some relatively benign process. As to any objection like "these people don't have time for all this email": I would guess a lot of these people have all too much downtime available for checking emails when they are flying around the world, waiting for meetings to start, etc, especially since the devices necessary to do this stuff now fit in your pocket and can connect to the network from almost everywhere. And since they are often extreme narcissists and the like, of course they are going to want to connect with their fellow power hungry weirdos.