excellent point, he could also promise to cut all the regulations on horse drawn buggies... and keep that promise to no real adverse effects and be able to say look i did it.
i work with full time coworkers that would forgo the service for 40 dollar difference, while i would probably pay 40 more than you do to get gigabit. my coworkers do not live in my neighborhood.
your analogy doesn't fit a secure worthiness of a electronic device. Most users would be just at loss when considering the myriad safety features and potential pitfalls of their vehicles and thus rely on the almost perfect (right!!) *** rating system. and at least its rather understandable to consider seatbelts (check) brakes (check) airbag (check) vs... is this device running the latest updated version of the linux distro, the apps are secured and there is firewall in place not to mention default username passwords unsecured portals blah blah... things an end user will never see, need to see and thus has no onus to understand. in reality it would be better to require a license to buy and install these devices for consumer safety.
wouldn't it make sense for them to deploy where people will buy their product especially when it is substantially more expensive product. and with the bonus of monetizing the usage data of high net-worth individuals who are probably a the target demographic of their advertising overlords...
but if you buy the premise that, you have a brand new system with a new chipset and cpu but for some reason decided on older spinning disks without built in cache (because you like your 1990's drive) then it all makes sense.
consumer protection would outlaw insecure devices. the consumer is not at fault for believing the device maker as atleast made an attempt to make the device safe for use, like all other things consumable. otherwise the maker gets sued... or perhaps its time for the makers to get sued.
its interesting that no one says, productivity first, or functionality first, or support first and god forbid security first... but we do have a cloud first, mobile first.
no one asked microsoft to add features just for fun. MS did so to make you want to spend money previously. win10 is not free and if you have an EA its not gotten any cheaper.
Its time that MS made a split between consumer and commercial, Os and Application, they are too big and they are failing.
heck they could easily fix the negativity they have introduced with tiles and telemetry but no, some psychopath in charge can't admit to be wrong and every one has to suffer.
maybe they will figure it out after a while of getting their butts kicked but i for one am not holding my breath.
are you being intentionally dense? you don't run or manage SCCM, you have microsoft do it in your cloud first deployment model, with cloud first outsourced management vendors, and it along with all your os's and applications continually change just as you and your end users get used to it after bitching for 6 months.
this is the a way for MS to stop people from bitching about the same thing for more than 6 months. they tried a 18 month bitch cycle (8 to 8.1 to 10...) but their software engineers have realized that perhaps if you make changes every 6 months all the users will either give up and just either commit suicide or go catatonic and just say yes to whatever is pushed down.
god is a Luddite concept, we worship at the altar of AI which is a large touch screen with Apps that can ape apps with their deep learning neural networks... or something like that
i don't buy your argument as clearly you are senile (56):)
on the other hand, i watched their demo at RSA and it looks really good right upto the point that you start asking questions like rate of false positives, and links and scripts that are legit use, and the ability to test the environment without their mandatory supervision. its definitely intriguing but they are way too cryptic about their product. and that does not leave a good taste considering today's lack of vendor trust environment.
Slashdot Mirror
the problem is the regulations holding back leeching, we need CanDo in Chief that will cut those regulations...
excellent point, he could also promise to cut all the regulations on horse drawn buggies... and keep that promise to no real adverse effects and be able to say look i did it.
i work with full time coworkers that would forgo the service for 40 dollar difference, while i would probably pay 40 more than you do to get gigabit.
my coworkers do not live in my neighborhood.
your analogy doesn't fit a secure worthiness of a electronic device. Most users would be just at loss when considering the myriad safety features and potential pitfalls of their vehicles and thus rely on the almost perfect (right!!) *** rating system. and at least its rather understandable to consider seatbelts (check) brakes (check) airbag (check) vs... is this device running the latest updated version of the linux distro, the apps are secured and there is firewall in place not to mention default username passwords unsecured portals blah blah... things an end user will never see, need to see and thus has no onus to understand.
in reality it would be better to require a license to buy and install these devices for consumer safety.
so the fitbit ... bit is just clickbait
wouldn't it make sense for them to deploy where people will buy their product especially when it is substantially more expensive product. and with the bonus of monetizing the usage data of high net-worth individuals who are probably a the target demographic of their advertising overlords...
but if you buy the premise that, you have a brand new system with a new chipset and cpu but for some reason decided on older spinning disks without built in cache (because you like your 1990's drive) then it all makes sense.
impossible? or just really stupid...
consumer protection would outlaw insecure devices. the consumer is not at fault for believing the device maker as atleast made an attempt to make the device safe for use, like all other things consumable. otherwise the maker gets sued... or perhaps its time for the makers to get sued.
hey no fair, you can't pick the best answer for yourself when asking the question.
its interesting that no one says, productivity first, or functionality first, or support first and god forbid security first... but we do have a cloud first, mobile first.
no one asked microsoft to add features just for fun. MS did so to make you want to spend money previously. win10 is not free and if you have an EA its not gotten any cheaper.
Its time that MS made a split between consumer and commercial, Os and Application, they are too big and they are failing.
heck they could easily fix the negativity they have introduced with tiles and telemetry but no, some psychopath in charge can't admit to be wrong and every one has to suffer.
maybe they will figure it out after a while of getting their butts kicked but i for one am not holding my breath.
are you being intentionally dense?
you don't run or manage SCCM, you have microsoft do it in your cloud first deployment model, with cloud first outsourced management vendors, and it along with all your os's and applications continually change just as you and your end users get used to it after bitching for 6 months.
this is the a way for MS to stop people from bitching about the same thing for more than 6 months. they tried a 18 month bitch cycle (8 to 8.1 to 10...) but their software engineers have realized that perhaps if you make changes every 6 months all the users will either give up and just either commit suicide or go catatonic and just say yes to whatever is pushed down.
if only india had money...?
god is a Luddite concept, we worship at the altar of AI which is a large touch screen with Apps that can ape apps with their deep learning neural networks... or something like that
i don't buy your argument as clearly you are senile (56) :)
on the other hand, i watched their demo at RSA and it looks really good right upto the point that you start asking questions like rate of false positives, and links and scripts that are legit use, and the ability to test the environment without their mandatory supervision. its definitely intriguing but they are way too cryptic about their product. and that does not leave a good taste considering today's lack of vendor trust environment.
you are completely secure citizen. not that you had anything to hide... right?
yes but the book also had marines in power armors with tactical nukes...
except now you can be blamed anywhere there is comcast.
well... as long as the sleeper can stay asleep.
LOL
you clearly missed the Butlerian jihad history class.
just wait till you can enable invisible tabs for scripts.
I am one who welcomes our preposition-less overlords.
the question was not about traffic segregation but rather about "ISP knows who's using the connection".