Had a similar issue with a surge protector warranty. They claimed the problem was electrical, and I said "no shit, that's what it is supposed to protect against".
Got as far as filing for small claims court on that one.
No, they sued because Apple stole their patented technology and gave it to Intel, because Intel modems sucked and Apple wanted them to be as good as Qualcomm ones.
Apple likes to have two sources for every part they buy in, both as insurance if one has supply issues and to play each supplier off the other on price. Unfortunately for Apple Qualcomm modems are significantly better than Intel ones, and Apple actually had to artificially slow down the Qualcomm ones to make iPhones using them perform the same as iPhones with Intel modems.
In an effort to help Intel improve Apple gave their engineers some remedial classes based on the super secret NDA-protected information that Qualcomm gave them. Qualcomm found out, sued and won.
Apple is guilty, caught red handed. At this point they aren't even denying it any more, just arguing over the punishment and trying to fight back by moaning about Qualcomm's licencing terms. See, Qualcomm is required to licence patents under fair and reasonable terms, and that usually means swapping patent licences... But Apple's patents are all shit, rounded corners and bouncy scrolling, and of no use to Qualcomm so they just asked for cash. Same terms as everyone else paying cash, in fact, but Apple thinks it's special and should get a discount.
Apparently being better than Intel is an antitrust violation because how can Apple force them to licence at a lower price if they are better!? It's unfair, like how Lexus rips everyone off by charging more than Dacia just because their cars are better. If they weren't an illegal monopoly they would make worse cars and sell them at the same price as a Fiat 500.
Isn't it obvious? They were not going to spend money to fix some theoretical problem, especially when there are no real consequences if it actually does get exploited. Release a patch, wait for the 24 hour news cycle to move on, day after that everyone has forgotten and most people never even heard that your software is insecure. Sales unaffected.
They don't understand how Google works anyway. It's a trade secret and they are almost certainly wrong.
Plus they are making their own sites more shitty. When I read an article about something on the web, I expect a link. If you don't have a link to it you probably screwed up, except for rare cases where there is some reasonable justification.
Google probably knows that that likely down-ranks sites that are all internal links and no external ones.
SEO is the worst kind of shit shovelling. Make a good site, people will come. SEO a site and it will just degenerate into clickbait crap.
LED bulbs went through the cost reduction/reliability curve.
Started out expensive but reliable and well engineered. Got cheap and unreliable, but then they figured out what the common failure modes were and fixed them, and now some of the cheap ones like IKEA are good.
You think Germany runs the EU, and it's some kind of secret backdoor takeover of the continent? That's the kind of nonsense conspiracy that the Daily Mail would print.
Churchill was a great supporter of a United States of Europe. That must blow you mind, but it's true.
Considering Google was contemplating operating in China I doubt that they would pull out of the EU.
The EU one of the largest markets in the world. More people than the US and GDP destined to overtake it in the not too distant future. They won't give up all those billions and billions of Euros just over this.
Besides, people said that GDPR and the Right to be Forgotten was the end of the internet, and it turned out to be fine.
An unseen group of unelected bureaucrats that are not under any elected control. Who runs them? Who knows?
Laws a proposed by the Commission, which is made up of representatives appointed by each member state's government, which in turn is made up of people you elect.
They are a civil service, similar to how politicians on most member states don't actually write the laws themselves, they have civil servants write them and then review and ask for changes.
The idea is that the Commission takes direction from the Council, which is made up of member states' leaders (i.e. people you elected), comes up with proposals that they think will make things better and puts them to the Parliament. The Parliament can reject them or ask for changes if necessary.
In addition, member states have vetoes in many cases, including anything which requires a new treaty to implement.
Also, if the Parliament doesn't like what the Commission or the Council is doing, it can get rid of them. That happened in 1999. The Parliament is DIRECTLY elected by citizens of member states.
If you don't know this it's because you are wilfully ignorant.
So instead of whining about the check-outs, you should be outraged that you have to walk into the store at all. Why should you do the clerk's job?
One of the reasons that people like online shopping is that it eliminates the need to do the clerk's job yourself. No need to push the trolley round when you order online.
This is probably quite effective. Consider that the worst most people have to worry about is normal law enforcement, who don't have supercomputers and zero day exploits available, so the best they can do is try to unlock your phone and check its contents.
Securely deleting data, especially if it is by deleting an encryption key for that data, is generally very effective against law enforcement and we have seen over and over again that it works.
Busses are even easier than taxis because you can just plug in at the terminal while they change drivers and get cleaned. Most new busses in China have been electric for years now, with high power chargers for their up to 450kWh battery packs.
They use a narrow focus beam when transmitting, to increase efficiency. In fact they claim that at 75kW they get 96% efficiency, compared to 93% over a cable.
For a moving target the system would be a lot less efficient as the beam could not be as focused, or would have to somehow track a moving object.
Taxis spend a long time sat still anyway, as they line up at the taxi rank. Might as well take advantage of that.
It might backfire because the fake news pushers are trying to game the system and will make use of this to get promoted over truthful posts which don't link to PubMed.
The key difference is that the maximum damage that a solar panel can do is known. It can fall on people, it can get blown around and smash stuff up, same as lots of other solar panel sized things we deal with all the time.
Nuclear power could, if the failure was catastrophic enough, causing trillions of Euros/Dollars of damage. Even a relatively contained accident like Fukushima is costing hundreds of billions to deal with, and the compensation claims are still coming.
So while it's possible there are failure modes for solar PV we have not thought of or consider extremely unlikely, the cost of that failure is manageable and doesn't stop solar PV being affordable or practical. The same cannot be said of nuclear.
Unfortunately that wouldn't help because peddlers of fake news long ago realized that linking to authoritative sources is a good way to add credibility to your claims, and that no-one ever bothers to check them.
The issue is that Instagram clearly knows that the person is interested in anti-vaxx bullshit, and instead of doing what most people would consider the moral thing and pointing them towards material debunking it, gives them more re-enforcement and helps fortify their bubble.
If someone you claimed to care about said they were skeptical of vaccines, would you buy them a book about the dangers of vaccines for Christmas or try to point them towards the truth, for the sake of their kids and herd immunity if nothing else?
Slashdot Mirror
Sometimes I think shitting arrogantly is the only pleasure some people have in life. Sad.
Had a similar issue with a surge protector warranty. They claimed the problem was electrical, and I said "no shit, that's what it is supposed to protect against".
Got as far as filing for small claims court on that one.
Don't people scan their receipts? I bought a document scanner years ago (used) and scan important receipts once a month.
I've used the scans to get LED bulbs replaced when required.
No, they sued because Apple stole their patented technology and gave it to Intel, because Intel modems sucked and Apple wanted them to be as good as Qualcomm ones.
Apple likes to have two sources for every part they buy in, both as insurance if one has supply issues and to play each supplier off the other on price. Unfortunately for Apple Qualcomm modems are significantly better than Intel ones, and Apple actually had to artificially slow down the Qualcomm ones to make iPhones using them perform the same as iPhones with Intel modems.
In an effort to help Intel improve Apple gave their engineers some remedial classes based on the super secret NDA-protected information that Qualcomm gave them. Qualcomm found out, sued and won.
Apple is guilty, caught red handed. At this point they aren't even denying it any more, just arguing over the punishment and trying to fight back by moaning about Qualcomm's licencing terms. See, Qualcomm is required to licence patents under fair and reasonable terms, and that usually means swapping patent licences... But Apple's patents are all shit, rounded corners and bouncy scrolling, and of no use to Qualcomm so they just asked for cash. Same terms as everyone else paying cash, in fact, but Apple thinks it's special and should get a discount.
Apparently being better than Intel is an antitrust violation because how can Apple force them to licence at a lower price if they are better!? It's unfair, like how Lexus rips everyone off by charging more than Dacia just because their cars are better. If they weren't an illegal monopoly they would make worse cars and sell them at the same price as a Fiat 500.
Why didn't they fix this earlier, TFS asks?
Isn't it obvious? They were not going to spend money to fix some theoretical problem, especially when there are no real consequences if it actually does get exploited. Release a patch, wait for the 24 hour news cycle to move on, day after that everyone has forgotten and most people never even heard that your software is insecure. Sales unaffected.
They don't understand how Google works anyway. It's a trade secret and they are almost certainly wrong.
Plus they are making their own sites more shitty. When I read an article about something on the web, I expect a link. If you don't have a link to it you probably screwed up, except for rare cases where there is some reasonable justification.
Google probably knows that that likely down-ranks sites that are all internal links and no external ones.
SEO is the worst kind of shit shovelling. Make a good site, people will come. SEO a site and it will just degenerate into clickbait crap.
LED bulbs went through the cost reduction/reliability curve.
Started out expensive but reliable and well engineered. Got cheap and unreliable, but then they figured out what the common failure modes were and fixed them, and now some of the cheap ones like IKEA are good.
You think Germany runs the EU, and it's some kind of secret backdoor takeover of the continent? That's the kind of nonsense conspiracy that the Daily Mail would print.
Churchill was a great supporter of a United States of Europe. That must blow you mind, but it's true.
Considering Google was contemplating operating in China I doubt that they would pull out of the EU.
The EU one of the largest markets in the world. More people than the US and GDP destined to overtake it in the not too distant future. They won't give up all those billions and billions of Euros just over this.
Besides, people said that GDPR and the Right to be Forgotten was the end of the internet, and it turned out to be fine.
We really don't want courts involved in this. Courts are expensive and many people can't afford to properly defend themselves.
Best thing would just be to make the penalty for non-commercial infringement zero.
sell your email
Don't suppose you have any evidence of that do you? Like an auction page where I can bid for people's email or something?
That functionality has been integrated into Gmail. It does it for flights and other bookings too.
An unseen group of unelected bureaucrats that are not under any elected control. Who runs them? Who knows?
Laws a proposed by the Commission, which is made up of representatives appointed by each member state's government, which in turn is made up of people you elect.
They are a civil service, similar to how politicians on most member states don't actually write the laws themselves, they have civil servants write them and then review and ask for changes.
The idea is that the Commission takes direction from the Council, which is made up of member states' leaders (i.e. people you elected), comes up with proposals that they think will make things better and puts them to the Parliament. The Parliament can reject them or ask for changes if necessary.
In addition, member states have vetoes in many cases, including anything which requires a new treaty to implement.
Also, if the Parliament doesn't like what the Commission or the Council is doing, it can get rid of them. That happened in 1999. The Parliament is DIRECTLY elected by citizens of member states.
If you don't know this it's because you are wilfully ignorant.
So instead of whining about the check-outs, you should be outraged that you have to walk into the store at all. Why should you do the clerk's job?
One of the reasons that people like online shopping is that it eliminates the need to do the clerk's job yourself. No need to push the trolley round when you order online.
This is probably quite effective. Consider that the worst most people have to worry about is normal law enforcement, who don't have supercomputers and zero day exploits available, so the best they can do is try to unlock your phone and check its contents.
Securely deleting data, especially if it is by deleting an encryption key for that data, is generally very effective against law enforcement and we have seen over and over again that it works.
and Apple apparently collects no information on you about where, when, or how much you're purchasing
That can't be true or they would have no way of billing you. Also legally they must collect that information in most countries.
Or are you saying that Apple doesn't have it but Mastercard does, which is even worse?
No international fees usually means really shitty exchange rates. A few cards give you a decent rate for overseas spending, but most are quite bad.
Isn't iTunes uncensored though? I see they have some unrated movies on there. For music they have uncensored lyrics.
It's only really the app store that doesn't allow adult content.
Have I understood your position?
No. Try again without all the strawman arguments.
Busses are even easier than taxis because you can just plug in at the terminal while they change drivers and get cleaned. Most new busses in China have been electric for years now, with high power chargers for their up to 450kWh battery packs.
They use a narrow focus beam when transmitting, to increase efficiency. In fact they claim that at 75kW they get 96% efficiency, compared to 93% over a cable.
For a moving target the system would be a lot less efficient as the beam could not be as focused, or would have to somehow track a moving object.
Taxis spend a long time sat still anyway, as they line up at the taxi rank. Might as well take advantage of that.
It might backfire because the fake news pushers are trying to game the system and will make use of this to get promoted over truthful posts which don't link to PubMed.
The key difference is that the maximum damage that a solar panel can do is known. It can fall on people, it can get blown around and smash stuff up, same as lots of other solar panel sized things we deal with all the time.
Nuclear power could, if the failure was catastrophic enough, causing trillions of Euros/Dollars of damage. Even a relatively contained accident like Fukushima is costing hundreds of billions to deal with, and the compensation claims are still coming.
So while it's possible there are failure modes for solar PV we have not thought of or consider extremely unlikely, the cost of that failure is manageable and doesn't stop solar PV being affordable or practical. The same cannot be said of nuclear.
Unfortunately that wouldn't help because peddlers of fake news long ago realized that linking to authoritative sources is a good way to add credibility to your claims, and that no-one ever bothers to check them.
The issue is that Instagram clearly knows that the person is interested in anti-vaxx bullshit, and instead of doing what most people would consider the moral thing and pointing them towards material debunking it, gives them more re-enforcement and helps fortify their bubble.
If someone you claimed to care about said they were skeptical of vaccines, would you buy them a book about the dangers of vaccines for Christmas or try to point them towards the truth, for the sake of their kids and herd immunity if nothing else?