But then they would have to have different manufacturing for China, re-test it all for durability and long life etc. They know how those materials perform over 20 years and in all sorts of conditions from desert to sub-arctic.
It's probably easier just to treat the car to get rid of the smell.
"Yakked"? He's still banging on about it. Whenever anything comes out about the Russia investigation he tweets about how they still haven't locked up Hilary.
Actually that's a pile of bullshit. Google doesn't expect or demand absolute perfection (after all, it's own services would be quickly banned if it did). It requires a decent effort to be made, and in this case Tumbler admitted that they failed to properly maintain their databases. They didn't demonstrate their competence or dedication to the task.
One solution to the "last mile problem" is local loop unbundling, that is forcing the company that owns the last mile infrastructure to open it up to everyone. Of course they can charge fees to use it, but they have to charge everyone (including themselves) the same fee.
It's drastic but sometimes the advantage that owning that infrastructure conveys is so great that it prevents any effective competition. Without it they would have one or maybe two ISPs at the most in the UK.
The alternative is breaking the company up like the US did with AT&T.
Not quite as simple as that, is it? Your own link explains the issue.
Driving the competition out of business by selling at a loss (including free) is not allowed in most EU countries. Other examples include newspapers that cut their price to something ridiculous temporarily. Large companies using their immense cash reserves to buy the market is hardly a new thing.
Google claim they are doing it for the benefit of society, but that's a hard sell. Probably didn't help that they were also being investigated for other anti-competitive behaviour with Android at the same time.
The headline says "force" but the report says "encourage". The government could require some amount of data sharing, perhaps with mandatory licencing similar to music or phone network local loop unbundling. It's not without precedent and can be fairly compensated.
The other issue is privacy. If the data is freely available then it can be more easily abused. At least with these companies they are regulated.
Just carrying "black channels" doesn't help them. What matters is how they made the decision about this particular channel.
Maybe the other channels predated the current racist staff, or were evaluated by someone else. Maybe they are owned by other companies, or they had to take them as part of a larger deal/bundle. The fact that they have them doesn't prove anything about this decision.
If it's balance of probabilities then witness statements confirming racism, especially independent witnesses or multiple similar accounts, will carry a lot of weight.
Will they have access to Charter emails? I think they can ask the judge for access. Seems like some insight into their decision making process would be relevant. The judge might question why Charter was't providing those emails in its defence too, should they choose not to.
Just refusing to carry some non-black-owned channels is meaningless and doesn't help them, because they may have legitimate non-racist reasons for doing so. All that matters is if racism was a factor with this channel.
Why don't you just demand laws to stop this kind of thing? We have them in Europe. My Leaf had a 3G modem, and if I didn't agree to sharing data every time I started the car no data would be shared. If Nissan did share it I could complain to the data regulator, they could be fined a percentage of global turnover etc.
Actually I can answer my own question. Corporations write your laws and own your politicians, which means they own you.
They made a conscious decision to incorporate some elements from wider society at the time, and to dramatise events to help convey the character's feelings and struggles. Voice-over internal monologues don't work so well on film.
That's fairly standard stuff with historical dramas. The goal is not really to give you an accurate history lesson, it's to help you understand the wider issues and the context of the time, to generate empathy and to provide some entertainment.
Okay, so you are saying that at least 35% were white but not born US citizens, likely much higher given that as you say some of the non-white employees were likely US born.
This is just taking us even further from the published stats, which are legally mandated with consequences for them being inaccurate.
The Pixel 3 currently has the best camera of any phone, and it only has one.
So more accurately you could say that there are multiple ways to improve the quality of photos taken on a phone, and most manufacturers seem to be opting for the multiple camera solution.
Slashdot Mirror
But then they would have to have different manufacturing for China, re-test it all for durability and long life etc. They know how those materials perform over 20 years and in all sorts of conditions from desert to sub-arctic.
It's probably easier just to treat the car to get rid of the smell.
Was her private email server an "unsecured location"? Did it lack passwords, was it publicly accessible?
"Yakked"? He's still banging on about it. Whenever anything comes out about the Russia investigation he tweets about how they still haven't locked up Hilary.
You forgot "the investigation is re-opened 2 weeks before the presidential election".
Sounds like they are failing to fix the problem so panicked and went berserk with the ban-hammer. Getting back on Android must be worth a lot to them.
Actually that's a pile of bullshit. Google doesn't expect or demand absolute perfection (after all, it's own services would be quickly banned if it did). It requires a decent effort to be made, and in this case Tumbler admitted that they failed to properly maintain their databases. They didn't demonstrate their competence or dedication to the task.
Trolled by the law. Pathetic, but predictable.
Should have gone with Comparatively Colossal Carrying Projectile.
You forgot the most obvious example, another one from Musk: Autopilot.
One solution to the "last mile problem" is local loop unbundling, that is forcing the company that owns the last mile infrastructure to open it up to everyone. Of course they can charge fees to use it, but they have to charge everyone (including themselves) the same fee.
It's drastic but sometimes the advantage that owning that infrastructure conveys is so great that it prevents any effective competition. Without it they would have one or maybe two ISPs at the most in the UK.
The alternative is breaking the company up like the US did with AT&T.
Not quite as simple as that, is it? Your own link explains the issue.
Driving the competition out of business by selling at a loss (including free) is not allowed in most EU countries. Other examples include newspapers that cut their price to something ridiculous temporarily. Large companies using their immense cash reserves to buy the market is hardly a new thing.
Google claim they are doing it for the benefit of society, but that's a hard sell. Probably didn't help that they were also being investigated for other anti-competitive behaviour with Android at the same time.
The headline says "force" but the report says "encourage". The government could require some amount of data sharing, perhaps with mandatory licencing similar to music or phone network local loop unbundling. It's not without precedent and can be fairly compensated.
The other issue is privacy. If the data is freely available then it can be more easily abused. At least with these companies they are regulated.
Just carrying "black channels" doesn't help them. What matters is how they made the decision about this particular channel.
Maybe the other channels predated the current racist staff, or were evaluated by someone else. Maybe they are owned by other companies, or they had to take them as part of a larger deal/bundle. The fact that they have them doesn't prove anything about this decision.
If it's balance of probabilities then witness statements confirming racism, especially independent witnesses or multiple similar accounts, will carry a lot of weight.
Will they have access to Charter emails? I think they can ask the judge for access. Seems like some insight into their decision making process would be relevant. The judge might question why Charter was't providing those emails in its defence too, should they choose not to.
Just refusing to carry some non-black-owned channels is meaningless and doesn't help them, because they may have legitimate non-racist reasons for doing so. All that matters is if racism was a factor with this channel.
Why don't you just demand laws to stop this kind of thing? We have them in Europe. My Leaf had a 3G modem, and if I didn't agree to sharing data every time I started the car no data would be shared. If Nissan did share it I could complain to the data regulator, they could be fined a percentage of global turnover etc.
Actually I can answer my own question. Corporations write your laws and own your politicians, which means they own you.
And "Hidden Figures" cares little for facts.
They made a conscious decision to incorporate some elements from wider society at the time, and to dramatise events to help convey the character's feelings and struggles. Voice-over internal monologues don't work so well on film.
That's fairly standard stuff with historical dramas. The goal is not really to give you an accurate history lesson, it's to help you understand the wider issues and the context of the time, to generate empathy and to provide some entertainment.
The WaPo article this is based on doesn't directly link Musk's behaviour to the investigation, which is also looking a Boeing.
https://www.washingtonpost.com...
Seems like they are just doing their due diligence and checking out both the companies that will be putting humans in space for them.
What is the standard of evidence here? If it's balance of probabilities then it seems like Charter is fucked.
It's a sheet of paper. You can weaponize it by rolling it up and hitting your enemies over the head with it, or giving them paper cuts.
Nah, you just ignore evidence that contradicts your views when I offer it. At least be honest with yourself about it.
The advantage of software is cost. One camera is cheaper than two.
Problem is that without any evidence and an extraordinary claim it's hard for people to accept what you are saying.
I'd love to see something, anything... A photo?
Okay, so you are saying that at least 35% were white but not born US citizens, likely much higher given that as you say some of the non-white employees were likely US born.
This is just taking us even further from the published stats, which are legally mandated with consequences for them being inaccurate.
The Pixel 3 currently has the best camera of any phone, and it only has one.
So more accurately you could say that there are multiple ways to improve the quality of photos taken on a phone, and most manufacturers seem to be opting for the multiple camera solution.