Why is it always gender studies used as the example? What about all the guys playing football, 99.99% of which never get more than a mild brain injury out of it?
It's not just the consumers that are the problem. The industry considers an Oscar, or an Oscar nomination, to be a qualification. Actors get more money, directors get more work, and movies get a marketing boost when the next one is from "two time Oscar nominated director" starring "Academy Award nominee".
It's effectiveness is of course debatable - Crap like Mortal Engines can still fall flat on its face despite the big names attached. Actually even Spielberg didn't do so well with Battle Angel.
We have laws mandating appliance and car manufacturers supply spare parts for X years after the product is discontinued. Why not have the same for digital stuff that relies on servers?
Not just fitness gadgets, online games, online music/video libraries, anything that requires any external service to work. Either they keep it going for X years, they offer a way to operate without it that doesn't reduce functionality, or they pay out.
I guess they are using pre-tensioned glass, like they use on phones. Basically they pre-tension it and fill the micro imperfections with some secret sauce. That way when it is forced to change shape by thermal changes or by blunt force trauma it doesn't crack.
Well if you want to do it to scene group release standards...
You need to rip with a known good drive that can detect and re-read errors, and the compare with an online checksum database to make sure that the data is perfect. Then add tags in the standard format, not whatever crap CDDB has in it. Then add album artwork. Add a.cue file and metadata for gapless playback. Compress as FLAC or MP3 with specific settings in LAME. Finally rename all the files in the correct format.
Of course for your own use you don't need to do all that, but it certainly helps with organization if you do.
I'll be modded into oblivion for this, but yeah... This is actually an example of how tackling systemic issues benefits everyone. In this case Google had proposed some changes, looked at them and noticed that they would create unfairness for men, and decided not to do them.
Even a decade ago they probably wouldn't have bothered to check and just gone ahead with it. At least now companies are thinking about these things.
It's more subtle than that. There are far more men with CS degrees, but sometimes they are not being paid as much at the start of their careers. Later in their careers they tend to do better than women. On average, caveat caveat caveat etc.
Part of living in a free god damn society is having the freedom to do questionable, potentially stupid things.
Only if they only affect you. If you do 112 MPH on a public road you are quite likely to injure or kill others, not to mention damage their property.
More over, the public road isn't your personal playground, it's a shared resource we all contributed to and we collectively decided on rules for its use. Supporting very high speeds costs money - additional safety equipment on the road, higher maintenance standards, extra emergency services. Are you volunteering to pay for that or do you think everyone should fund your racing driver lifestyle?
The problem with GPS systems is that the map data gets out of date. Even Tesla has that problem with their over-the-air updates take months or years to recognize new limits.
Other manufacturers have the ability to read road signs with a camera now, but it's not 100% perfect.
Being stuck at a lower limit on a fast road is potentially quite dangerous. Having said that, why not limit to say 150 kph except when near Germany? Germany is pretty static so no issues with map updates, and the limit in the rest of Europe is 120 kph.
In Europe if you modify your car in almost any way it increases your insurance. If it's a performance mod your insurance will shoot up. Insurance is mandatory. If you don't tell them it is invalidated, you broke the law and you will liable for any costs and will find it extremely expensive to get insurance in the future.
So there is a very strong incentive not to modify the performance of your car.
There is some evidence that the more safety features you add to a road the less care people drive with. Removing the centre partition in particular slows people down a lot, but also creates problems when there are insurance claims or badly parked vehicles.
Japanese manufacturers have been doing this for decades and it doesn't seem to have hurt them. They have a gentlemen's agreement to limit their cars' top speed.
For performance models some now have a system that disables the limit when you get to a racetrack.
Often the fact that the computer says something primes the person reviewing the situation to believe it, creating a bias. In fact even just filtering out all the ones that are likely to be fraudulent can create bias, as the perceived amount off fraud goes from 4% to nearly 75%. Suddenly fraud isn't rare any more, it's the norm.
Problem is that 8,000 people were royally screwed by this. People literally starving, having to rely on charity hand-outs to feed themselves and their children because the system made a mistake. That's pretty callous.
Best thing now would be for all 8,000 people to submit GDPR review requests. The GDPR allows for decisions made by machines to be reviewed by a human on request.
The alphabet agencies have a vested interest in you thinking they have a hard time accessing your information.
Okay, but let's look at the threat model. Alphabet agency wants to use secret backdoor to unlock your phone, but can't let it become public so no way to present that evidence in open court. Meaning that by the time they use it against you, you are probably already rotting in Guantanamo anyway and the 5$ wrench crypto attack is probably a lot easier than using an exploit.
Also if you are worried about that kind of thing, you are pretty screwed anyway because what are you going to trust with your secrets? Everything could theoretically be backdoored or exploitable.
What they do do is sell users' info the the highest bidder
That too has been debunked. It doesn't even pass the sniff test - why would they sell their most valuable asset, the thing that the value of their advertising services derives from?
Obviously if you have any evidence showing that they have in fact sold personal info I'd very much like to see it, so I can file a GDPR complaint against them. Because it's illegal in the EU.
Most people use really bad passwords over and over for multiple sites. Thus being able to use their mobile device is a vast improvement to their security.
By the way, do you have any evidence that Google/Apple are actually a security threat to you? For example, it seems like law enforcement is forced to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to compromise phones because Google/Apple refuse to help them, so I'm wondering exactly what your threat model is.
This will probably always be the case because physical media can be sold second hand, which keeps prices down. There is no effective way that the music industry can control used CD prices.
Downloads tend to stay full price or at least very over-priced. Audio books especially - you can buy them used for very little, but a digital version is often 20 to 30 bucks.
PROTIP, don't waste your time ripping. Just head over to The Pirate Bay and grab a copy, complete with all the tagging and artwork done for you. The release groups have a standard format for everything so they are easy to organize. They check for defects and also include metadata for gapless playback.
So it's a compliance car. Losing money on every one unless they upsell, exists purely to fulfil Musk's promise.
Similar to "Full Self Driving" that is nothing of the sort, and is only called that to try to stave off lawsuits from people who bought it three years ago but haven't had it delivered yet.
Slashdot Mirror
Isn't everything working as expected?
No, because you are looking at it back-to-front.
The idea is to fix the systemic problems, which will naturally result in greater diversity. Diversity levels are not the goal, fixing the cause is.
Why is it always gender studies used as the example? What about all the guys playing football, 99.99% of which never get more than a mild brain injury out of it?
Wouldn't a software engineer who is better than a Level 4 be a Level 5?
It's not just the consumers that are the problem. The industry considers an Oscar, or an Oscar nomination, to be a qualification. Actors get more money, directors get more work, and movies get a marketing boost when the next one is from "two time Oscar nominated director" starring "Academy Award nominee".
It's effectiveness is of course debatable - Crap like Mortal Engines can still fall flat on its face despite the big names attached. Actually even Spielberg didn't do so well with Battle Angel.
We have laws mandating appliance and car manufacturers supply spare parts for X years after the product is discontinued. Why not have the same for digital stuff that relies on servers?
Not just fitness gadgets, online games, online music/video libraries, anything that requires any external service to work. Either they keep it going for X years, they offer a way to operate without it that doesn't reduce functionality, or they pay out.
I guess they are using pre-tensioned glass, like they use on phones. Basically they pre-tension it and fill the micro imperfections with some secret sauce. That way when it is forced to change shape by thermal changes or by blunt force trauma it doesn't crack.
Well if you want to do it to scene group release standards...
You need to rip with a known good drive that can detect and re-read errors, and the compare with an online checksum database to make sure that the data is perfect. Then add tags in the standard format, not whatever crap CDDB has in it. Then add album artwork. Add a .cue file and metadata for gapless playback. Compress as FLAC or MP3 with specific settings in LAME. Finally rename all the files in the correct format.
Of course for your own use you don't need to do all that, but it certainly helps with organization if you do.
I'll be modded into oblivion for this, but yeah... This is actually an example of how tackling systemic issues benefits everyone. In this case Google had proposed some changes, looked at them and noticed that they would create unfairness for men, and decided not to do them.
Even a decade ago they probably wouldn't have bothered to check and just gone ahead with it. At least now companies are thinking about these things.
It's more subtle than that. There are far more men with CS degrees, but sometimes they are not being paid as much at the start of their careers. Later in their careers they tend to do better than women. On average, caveat caveat caveat etc.
Part of living in a free god damn society is having the freedom to do questionable, potentially stupid things.
Only if they only affect you. If you do 112 MPH on a public road you are quite likely to injure or kill others, not to mention damage their property.
More over, the public road isn't your personal playground, it's a shared resource we all contributed to and we collectively decided on rules for its use. Supporting very high speeds costs money - additional safety equipment on the road, higher maintenance standards, extra emergency services. Are you volunteering to pay for that or do you think everyone should fund your racing driver lifestyle?
The problem with GPS systems is that the map data gets out of date. Even Tesla has that problem with their over-the-air updates take months or years to recognize new limits.
Other manufacturers have the ability to read road signs with a camera now, but it's not 100% perfect.
Being stuck at a lower limit on a fast road is potentially quite dangerous. Having said that, why not limit to say 150 kph except when near Germany? Germany is pretty static so no issues with map updates, and the limit in the rest of Europe is 120 kph.
In Europe if you modify your car in almost any way it increases your insurance. If it's a performance mod your insurance will shoot up. Insurance is mandatory. If you don't tell them it is invalidated, you broke the law and you will liable for any costs and will find it extremely expensive to get insurance in the future.
So there is a very strong incentive not to modify the performance of your car.
It's a regular occurrence in Germany, where the autobhan has no speed limit in many places.
There is some evidence that the more safety features you add to a road the less care people drive with. Removing the centre partition in particular slows people down a lot, but also creates problems when there are insurance claims or badly parked vehicles.
Japanese manufacturers have been doing this for decades and it doesn't seem to have hurt them. They have a gentlemen's agreement to limit their cars' top speed.
For performance models some now have a system that disables the limit when you get to a racetrack.
Often the fact that the computer says something primes the person reviewing the situation to believe it, creating a bias. In fact even just filtering out all the ones that are likely to be fraudulent can create bias, as the perceived amount off fraud goes from 4% to nearly 75%. Suddenly fraud isn't rare any more, it's the norm.
Problem is that 8,000 people were royally screwed by this. People literally starving, having to rely on charity hand-outs to feed themselves and their children because the system made a mistake. That's pretty callous.
Best thing now would be for all 8,000 people to submit GDPR review requests. The GDPR allows for decisions made by machines to be reviewed by a human on request.
How does one access these user data auctions? Presumably they are wide open to everyone, in order to maximize profit.
The alphabet agencies have a vested interest in you thinking they have a hard time accessing your information.
Okay, but let's look at the threat model. Alphabet agency wants to use secret backdoor to unlock your phone, but can't let it become public so no way to present that evidence in open court. Meaning that by the time they use it against you, you are probably already rotting in Guantanamo anyway and the 5$ wrench crypto attack is probably a lot easier than using an exploit.
Also if you are worried about that kind of thing, you are pretty screwed anyway because what are you going to trust with your secrets? Everything could theoretically be backdoored or exploitable.
What they do do is sell users' info the the highest bidder
That too has been debunked. It doesn't even pass the sniff test - why would they sell their most valuable asset, the thing that the value of their advertising services derives from?
Obviously if you have any evidence showing that they have in fact sold personal info I'd very much like to see it, so I can file a GDPR complaint against them. Because it's illegal in the EU.
Most people use really bad passwords over and over for multiple sites. Thus being able to use their mobile device is a vast improvement to their security.
By the way, do you have any evidence that Google/Apple are actually a security threat to you? For example, it seems like law enforcement is forced to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to compromise phones because Google/Apple refuse to help them, so I'm wondering exactly what your threat model is.
Is anyone working on tech to help improve sleep? Like some kind of sleep regulator?
I'd love to have a device where I press a button and get a decent 8 hours of sleep.
This will probably always be the case because physical media can be sold second hand, which keeps prices down. There is no effective way that the music industry can control used CD prices.
Downloads tend to stay full price or at least very over-priced. Audio books especially - you can buy them used for very little, but a digital version is often 20 to 30 bucks.
PROTIP, don't waste your time ripping. Just head over to The Pirate Bay and grab a copy, complete with all the tagging and artwork done for you. The release groups have a standard format for everything so they are easy to organize. They check for defects and also include metadata for gapless playback.
Nothing corrupt about noticing that a bunch of companies are all pulling the same tax-dodge and trying to do something about it.
So it's a compliance car. Losing money on every one unless they upsell, exists purely to fulfil Musk's promise.
Similar to "Full Self Driving" that is nothing of the sort, and is only called that to try to stave off lawsuits from people who bought it three years ago but haven't had it delivered yet.