Why not just disable mag stripe payments on cards that have chips? The bank has to authorize the payment, and can simply decline if the terminal reports that it was by mag strip when the card has a chip.
That's what happened in the UK. There are some exceptions for people who can't use a PIN (numerical dyslexia etc.) but for most people it's PIN only. Retailers had a few years to upgrade their terminals; they don't last forever anyway so it wasn't even an extra cost.
The rights holders are quite happy to have their music on YouTube, as long as they get the ad revenue.
The problem at the moment is that a lot of the music on there was uploaded by other people, and they are raking in the profits. It happens with new music and also new movie trailers a lot. The official channel releases it, others copy and re-post the video and often the top search result or trending vid is the copy.
first, we know what happens with banking regulation; nothing at all (except bail outs) after 2008 fiasco, as far as banks are concerned.
Not in the EU. The rules that came in to prevent a repeat of that were quite tough and required banks to have a lot more in reserve. One of the reasons that the elite want Brexit is to get away from EU banking regulations.
that government doesn't want to regulate and protect citizens against violations of their right to privacy
Except France was one of the first to recognize the right to be forgotten and it was legal action in France that really pushed it to go EU wide.
Petrol stations won't become charging stations, they will just go out of business.
Most charging will be done at home or at work or at destinations like shops and restaurants. For long distances there will be rapid chargers at service areas on major roads.
The days of going out of your way just to fill up are coming to a close. 99% of the infrastructure is already there, it just needs the last few metres sorting out with sockets on lamp posts and in car parks etc.
Well his presence rather undermines the notion that people get fired for for the political views or that Facebook itself has some kind of corporate level political agenda.
I remember about 15 years ago someone made a plug-in that put Amazon prices for books on other bookshop sites, so you could compare easily. This seems to be a slightly more advanced version of that.
Like the old Amazon link plug-in I don't think it will take off, because people looking for bargains already know to check Google and PriceSpy etc. The intersection of people who don't know how to use Google but do know how to find and install this plug-in is going to be vanishingly small.
Stan Lee's brilliance was bringing a human aspect to his characters. There were lots of other Animal Man type characters, lots of guys in spandex out there, but Lee gave them everyday problems. Spiderman is probably he best example, a nerd with love problems and family problems and an endless supply of one-liners, trying to balance his school/work life and superhero life.
As well as making great stories and compelling characters, he helped a lot of young people process their own emotions and relate to those heroes, and find some escapism at the same time.
This is Who going back to its roots. It was originally supposed to be educational, which is why they had time travel. The Doctor could visit all sorts of historic events and teach kids about them, as well as doing some future stuff to look at some Star Trek style moral issues that reflect the issues of the day.
They are also going back to shorter story arcs, with more self contained episodes, because that's better for viewership. Moffat was terrible for that - often there was a little hint at something towards the end of the episode, but it never really built to anything and you just ended up feeling flat at the lack of proper pay-off.
There have been some good episodes, like the one with the little guy eating the ship. And the spiders were classic Who, a ikky monster to frighten the kids (this is 7 PM on Sunday remember) and a clear moral message. Again, very much like the 60s episodes and other shows of that era like Trek. The last episode had echos of The City on the Edge of Forever.
Shareholders would demand YouTube folds first. And probably fire Wojcicki for such a ridiculous gambit.
She is just trying to scare politicians. I've read the rules, they require less than what YouTube is already doing. YouTube has it's Content ID system that filters uploads based on rightsholder claims.
YouTube just doesn't want a legal mandate to use this filter, it prefers to negotiate from a position of strength with rightsholders over what will be allowed. Wojcicki doesn't want the balance of power shifted.
It's not hypocrisy, it's a different understanding of what freedom is.
In the US freedom is mostly about not being preventing from doing what you want. Most of the limits are to prevent harm to other people.
In Europe freedom also includes the opportunity to do things you want to do. So for example education is considered a human right, because without education you are severely limited in your ability to pursue your goals and to pursue happiness. The US has some of this, e.g. education is mandatory and parents can't prevent their kids getting any entirely.
So in this case it's clear to Europeans what they mean. Speech that limits the freedom of others, e.g. by inciting violence against them and making them afraid to live their lives as they wish is anti-freedom. Again, the US does recognize that to a lesser extent with laws against threats.
If you read TFA the main focus is actually not on such speech, it's on the fact that right now it's mostly corporations deciding what speech is acceptable. Many on Slashdot have been calling for companies like Facebook and Twitter to be forced to allow all legal speech rather than just what they wish to tolerate on their sites, so in theory should support this.
Men who have sex with 9 year old girls are pedophiles. -- This is a noncontroversial fact.
It's not a fact.
Men at that time often took many wives for political reasons, to form alliances and consolidate their power. Producing children was an important part of that, and they tended to do it as soon as possible because waiting was risky - either they or the wife could die before producing a child in an age where medicine was primitive and crime/war was more common.
As much as I deplore Mohammed for many reasons, he doesn't seem to have had any particular attraction to children. Most of his wives were older, the usual age for marriage and children at the time.
In modern times sex with 9 year olds is illegal and we understand why it's bad for the child, so most people refrain from doing it unless they have a strong attraction to pre-pubescent children that they are unable to control. By any reasonable definition of the word, Mohammed was not a paedophile.
I'm not saying that I agree with the law or the ruling in this case, merely that this claim is not true or at least not uncontroversial.
Jesus was a pedophile. -- This is ok, because Christians don't get offended easily.
Christians have put people to death for being gay, so pointing out that Jesus was very likely at least bisexual (even the Bible points out he liked to hang around with young, naked men/boys) would probably get a violent reaction from them in some parts of the world. Christianity is the justification for homosexuality being illegal in some African countries.
It would make more sense if you hadn't cut off the first sentence of that quote:
âoeThe internet is a space currently managed by a technical community of private players. But itâ(TM)s not governed. So now that half of humanity is online, we need to find new ways to organize the internet,â an official from Macronâ(TM)s office said.
âoeOtherwise, the internet as we know it today â" free, open and secure â" will be damaged by the new threats.â
He is clearly talking about corporations owning the internet, the end of net neutrality and businesses getting to decide what is acceptable online and what isn't.
In other words he is advocating free speech protection from corporation censorship, what many on Slashdot have been demanding.
It's a bit more complex than that. Taking the US as an example, it has relatively strong freedom of speech protections but also still has laws criminalizing certain forms of speech. Divulging official secrets, credible threats, harassment, violating medical confidentiality and so forth.
Naturally the government takes the position that the laws it passes should be enforceable, which means the ability to prosecute and remove that speech with due process.
In other words, no country has absolute unrestricted speech and they all have some balance between freedom and doing harm to others. The question they are considering is where the line lies, not if there should be zero censorship at all.
Other manufacturers manage to overcome this problem, and actually it's not hard. Laptops from companies like Lenovo and Dell have had the same level of resilience to the evil maid attack without locking out third party repairs. Replacing the secure memory won't help the evil maid, because that's where the encryption keys are stored so replacement means wiping the laptop's SSD which gives the game away and is easy to detect.
Perhaps you can explain exactly what benefit the T2 chip has in this regard.
The warranty will be intact, it just won't work any more. The law needs to catch up, like the GPL did many years ago with V3 that blocked Tivoization and other technical means of taking away your rights.
Same with DRM. You still have your first sale doctrine right to sell it second hand, it just won't be worth anything because DRM bricks it as soon as you do.
Apple has already blocked the installation of Linux by having the T2 chip disable all internal storage when you try. They have form with repairs too, such as the 3rd party iPhone home button/fingerprint scanners being rejected. Even the last MacBook Pro they released removed the data recovery header so that if the mobo dies you can't get anything off the soldered-down SSD any more.
There is a clear pattern here. Apple has always hated third party repairs, or giving users control of their computers and phones.
How about a phone that auto-wipes if I don't re-authorize with a strong password every 24 hours? And that wipes if it detects known data extraction tools, or for that matter any USB data connection unless I pre-authorize it?
You can buy Faraday cage bags with built in charging (so that the phone doesn't power down and disable PIN/finger/face unlock, although these days they have a time-out as well) for this purpose. Maybe they couldn't afford them, maybe they just screwed up.
I haven't forgotten, in fact Foxconn is an example of what I was talking about. Apple and other companies that outsource their manufacturing to Foxconn demanded improvements, and got them. Publicity like that forced them to improve.
In that for â10k less you get longer range, more tech including Autopilot, stuff like heated/ventilated seats, Android Auto, a proper utility mode, more cargo space, auto-dip mirrors, all sorts of stuff.
The only area where the Model 3 has a better spec is 0-60 times. Beyond that you can pay tens of thousands more to get more range and extras, but then it's not really comparable to a car that costs only half as much.
Part of it is a culture in Japan where people value features and are invest a bit of time in figuring out what to buy. In Europe people just look for something in their price range and get the one with the biggest motor, because moar power must be better and its an easily understood number.
Maybe Japans small apartments have an effect too, since people value things like compact size which tends to preclude having huge motors. Also they use 100V AC, so the maximum power delivery per outlet is realistically about 1000W, and even that is pushing it. Most of the high end cleaners seem to be in the 250-300W range.
Slashdot Mirror
Slashdot, where disagreements about the meaning of freedom (and not even me disagreeing BTW, just me explaining it) is considered trolling.
Free speech is dead here, never mind what comes of this.
Why not just disable mag stripe payments on cards that have chips? The bank has to authorize the payment, and can simply decline if the terminal reports that it was by mag strip when the card has a chip.
That's what happened in the UK. There are some exceptions for people who can't use a PIN (numerical dyslexia etc.) but for most people it's PIN only. Retailers had a few years to upgrade their terminals; they don't last forever anyway so it wasn't even an extra cost.
The rights holders are quite happy to have their music on YouTube, as long as they get the ad revenue.
The problem at the moment is that a lot of the music on there was uploaded by other people, and they are raking in the profits. It happens with new music and also new movie trailers a lot. The official channel releases it, others copy and re-post the video and often the top search result or trending vid is the copy.
It's funny that so many people think YouTube committing suicide is the best solution here.
Back in the real world if they really think it's that bad they will just go to court to argue it like adults, or find some way of passing the cost on.
first, we know what happens with banking regulation; nothing at all (except bail outs) after 2008 fiasco, as far as banks are concerned.
Not in the EU. The rules that came in to prevent a repeat of that were quite tough and required banks to have a lot more in reserve. One of the reasons that the elite want Brexit is to get away from EU banking regulations.
that government doesn't want to regulate and protect citizens against violations of their right to privacy
Except France was one of the first to recognize the right to be forgotten and it was legal action in France that really pushed it to go EU wide.
Petrol stations won't become charging stations, they will just go out of business.
Most charging will be done at home or at work or at destinations like shops and restaurants. For long distances there will be rapid chargers at service areas on major roads.
The days of going out of your way just to fill up are coming to a close. 99% of the infrastructure is already there, it just needs the last few metres sorting out with sockets on lamp posts and in car parks etc.
Well his presence rather undermines the notion that people get fired for for the political views or that Facebook itself has some kind of corporate level political agenda.
I remember about 15 years ago someone made a plug-in that put Amazon prices for books on other bookshop sites, so you could compare easily. This seems to be a slightly more advanced version of that.
Like the old Amazon link plug-in I don't think it will take off, because people looking for bargains already know to check Google and PriceSpy etc. The intersection of people who don't know how to use Google but do know how to find and install this plug-in is going to be vanishingly small.
Stan Lee's brilliance was bringing a human aspect to his characters. There were lots of other Animal Man type characters, lots of guys in spandex out there, but Lee gave them everyday problems. Spiderman is probably he best example, a nerd with love problems and family problems and an endless supply of one-liners, trying to balance his school/work life and superhero life.
As well as making great stories and compelling characters, he helped a lot of young people process their own emotions and relate to those heroes, and find some escapism at the same time.
This is Who going back to its roots. It was originally supposed to be educational, which is why they had time travel. The Doctor could visit all sorts of historic events and teach kids about them, as well as doing some future stuff to look at some Star Trek style moral issues that reflect the issues of the day.
They are also going back to shorter story arcs, with more self contained episodes, because that's better for viewership. Moffat was terrible for that - often there was a little hint at something towards the end of the episode, but it never really built to anything and you just ended up feeling flat at the lack of proper pay-off.
There have been some good episodes, like the one with the little guy eating the ship. And the spiders were classic Who, a ikky monster to frighten the kids (this is 7 PM on Sunday remember) and a clear moral message. Again, very much like the 60s episodes and other shows of that era like Trek. The last episode had echos of The City on the Edge of Forever.
Shareholders would demand YouTube folds first. And probably fire Wojcicki for such a ridiculous gambit.
She is just trying to scare politicians. I've read the rules, they require less than what YouTube is already doing. YouTube has it's Content ID system that filters uploads based on rightsholder claims.
YouTube just doesn't want a legal mandate to use this filter, it prefers to negotiate from a position of strength with rightsholders over what will be allowed. Wojcicki doesn't want the balance of power shifted.
It's not hypocrisy, it's a different understanding of what freedom is.
In the US freedom is mostly about not being preventing from doing what you want. Most of the limits are to prevent harm to other people.
In Europe freedom also includes the opportunity to do things you want to do. So for example education is considered a human right, because without education you are severely limited in your ability to pursue your goals and to pursue happiness. The US has some of this, e.g. education is mandatory and parents can't prevent their kids getting any entirely.
So in this case it's clear to Europeans what they mean. Speech that limits the freedom of others, e.g. by inciting violence against them and making them afraid to live their lives as they wish is anti-freedom. Again, the US does recognize that to a lesser extent with laws against threats.
If you read TFA the main focus is actually not on such speech, it's on the fact that right now it's mostly corporations deciding what speech is acceptable. Many on Slashdot have been calling for companies like Facebook and Twitter to be forced to allow all legal speech rather than just what they wish to tolerate on their sites, so in theory should support this.
Men who have sex with 9 year old girls are pedophiles. -- This is a noncontroversial fact.
It's not a fact.
Men at that time often took many wives for political reasons, to form alliances and consolidate their power. Producing children was an important part of that, and they tended to do it as soon as possible because waiting was risky - either they or the wife could die before producing a child in an age where medicine was primitive and crime/war was more common.
As much as I deplore Mohammed for many reasons, he doesn't seem to have had any particular attraction to children. Most of his wives were older, the usual age for marriage and children at the time.
In modern times sex with 9 year olds is illegal and we understand why it's bad for the child, so most people refrain from doing it unless they have a strong attraction to pre-pubescent children that they are unable to control. By any reasonable definition of the word, Mohammed was not a paedophile.
I'm not saying that I agree with the law or the ruling in this case, merely that this claim is not true or at least not uncontroversial.
Jesus was a pedophile. -- This is ok, because Christians don't get offended easily.
Christians have put people to death for being gay, so pointing out that Jesus was very likely at least bisexual (even the Bible points out he liked to hang around with young, naked men/boys) would probably get a violent reaction from them in some parts of the world. Christianity is the justification for homosexuality being illegal in some African countries.
It would make more sense if you hadn't cut off the first sentence of that quote:
âoeThe internet is a space currently managed by a technical community of private players. But itâ(TM)s not governed. So now that half of humanity is online, we need to find new ways to organize the internet,â an official from Macronâ(TM)s office said.
âoeOtherwise, the internet as we know it today â" free, open and secure â" will be damaged by the new threats.â
He is clearly talking about corporations owning the internet, the end of net neutrality and businesses getting to decide what is acceptable online and what isn't.
In other words he is advocating free speech protection from corporation censorship, what many on Slashdot have been demanding.
It's a bit more complex than that. Taking the US as an example, it has relatively strong freedom of speech protections but also still has laws criminalizing certain forms of speech. Divulging official secrets, credible threats, harassment, violating medical confidentiality and so forth.
Naturally the government takes the position that the laws it passes should be enforceable, which means the ability to prosecute and remove that speech with due process.
In other words, no country has absolute unrestricted speech and they all have some balance between freedom and doing harm to others. The question they are considering is where the line lies, not if there should be zero censorship at all.
Other manufacturers manage to overcome this problem, and actually it's not hard. Laptops from companies like Lenovo and Dell have had the same level of resilience to the evil maid attack without locking out third party repairs. Replacing the secure memory won't help the evil maid, because that's where the encryption keys are stored so replacement means wiping the laptop's SSD which gives the game away and is easy to detect.
Perhaps you can explain exactly what benefit the T2 chip has in this regard.
The warranty will be intact, it just won't work any more. The law needs to catch up, like the GPL did many years ago with V3 that blocked Tivoization and other technical means of taking away your rights.
Same with DRM. You still have your first sale doctrine right to sell it second hand, it just won't be worth anything because DRM bricks it as soon as you do.
Apple has already blocked the installation of Linux by having the T2 chip disable all internal storage when you try. They have form with repairs too, such as the 3rd party iPhone home button/fingerprint scanners being rejected. Even the last MacBook Pro they released removed the data recovery header so that if the mobo dies you can't get anything off the soldered-down SSD any more.
There is a clear pattern here. Apple has always hated third party repairs, or giving users control of their computers and phones.
How about a phone that auto-wipes if I don't re-authorize with a strong password every 24 hours? And that wipes if it detects known data extraction tools, or for that matter any USB data connection unless I pre-authorize it?
You can buy Faraday cage bags with built in charging (so that the phone doesn't power down and disable PIN/finger/face unlock, although these days they have a time-out as well) for this purpose. Maybe they couldn't afford them, maybe they just screwed up.
Okay, who is so fragile that they were triggered by a post about vacuum cleaners and had to mod it "troll"???
I haven't forgotten, in fact Foxconn is an example of what I was talking about. Apple and other companies that outsource their manufacturing to Foxconn demanded improvements, and got them. Publicity like that forced them to improve.
In that for â10k less you get longer range, more tech including Autopilot, stuff like heated/ventilated seats, Android Auto, a proper utility mode, more cargo space, auto-dip mirrors, all sorts of stuff.
The only area where the Model 3 has a better spec is 0-60 times. Beyond that you can pay tens of thousands more to get more range and extras, but then it's not really comparable to a car that costs only half as much.
What about Peter Thiel? He's on the Facebook board and gave far more money to Trump than Lucky did.
Part of it is a culture in Japan where people value features and are invest a bit of time in figuring out what to buy. In Europe people just look for something in their price range and get the one with the biggest motor, because moar power must be better and its an easily understood number.
Maybe Japans small apartments have an effect too, since people value things like compact size which tends to preclude having huge motors. Also they use 100V AC, so the maximum power delivery per outlet is realistically about 1000W, and even that is pushing it. Most of the high end cleaners seem to be in the 250-300W range.