Competition? Oh, you're _hilarious_. What's the competition for Facebook, hmmm? Google Plus? Tencent?
What's the competition for Slashdot where I'd still get the/. community (which for _some_ subjects is the only reason I haven't completely abandoned/.)?
There is no competition for many of the sites that have been forced into spamming me with cookie authorisation popups, there is just the new reality that given that I'm reading in France there are now many popups that people in other countries don't have to suffer through.
Snort, use of cookies is endemic and will not change. Everyone just clicks through the popups so _NOBODY_ changes the websites to not use cookies so the only end result is more annoying popups.
The end result isn't less use of cookies but more annoying popups.
Much like the French judgment that users need to be informed about the use of cookies on websites, all that is going to change in the end is that the users are going to be getting more popups with a refined text that nobody reads to click on to use the services in question.
How do I know this? because it's exactly what I see when connecting to websites that use cookies from France, including Slashdot.
About once a week, when clicking on a frontpage link on Slashdot, I get a "Warning you are in France and need to click on this button stating that you are OK with Slashdot using cookies to track you". It's fracking annoying to tell the truth. Why must I renew my acceptance _EVERY_FRACKING_WEEK?!? Because the stupid law says that "All sites can only keep cookies for a week and must ask again every time the cookie times out".
Clicking every week (which I will do because I want to use Slashdot & that Germans will do because they want to use Facebook) will change precisely nothing but make a bunch of obsessive people who write laws ever so slightly happier.
Poor poor Assange, _forced_ to dip into the money raised for Manning to get decent Take-Out delivered in London...
I don't blame the Swedes. Their legal system is what it is and shouldn't special case for Assange. They may have dropped the case for the moment but left open the door to re-opening it if Assange becomes available.
As for the Brits, their dedication to not letting that oath breaking, abusive weasel slip out & avoid what is coming to him is admirable.
That the Ecuadorians have realised what an unpleasant person he is and wish he was gone is just karma for their enabling him to avoid justice for so long.
Polanski had also pled guilty and was awaiting sentencing before he jumped bail which is another separate reason for there being no applicable statue of limitations for him.
Assange was allowed to leave Sweden, true, the rest is all lies and half truths.
Assange refused to talk to the Swedish investigators until after the extradition proceedings had finished, broke his pledge to respect the UK's sovereignty (a condition of his being released from custody until the end of the extradition hearings), skipped bail and fled to the Ecuadorian Embassy and then imposed unacceptable preconditions on the investigators (all questions to be submitted before the meeting and Assange gets to choose those he is willing to answer).
His claim that the Swedish charges was a pretext to an extradition from Sweden to the U.S is laughable given that such extradition would be much easier from the U.K and almost impossible from Sweden.
Assange is a sexual predator with a messianic complex who is now stuck in difficult circumstances of his own creation and trying to play the clock to avoid paying for his crimes.
Do you also contribute to Washington state politicians as much as Microsoft does to "ensure a favorable business environment"?
Because I'm thinking that an unhappy Microsoft will be contributing to different politicians or shopping around the country for a new campus the way Amazon has.
All supported devices can get a one time battery replacement for $29 but phones models old enough to be out of support, Samsung phones, cars, boats, planes rocket ships, etc, are out of luck. With the extra demand caused in large part because Apple proposed that special offer, supply is currently tight so Apple is trying to get people that still have >85, 95 and even 95% of initial capacity to wait a little for supplies to be better and not have people with phones have to wait.
And yes, while waiting for Apple to look at my aging rMBP’s battery that only charges to 65% I have personally seen a prick with 95% insist that HIS phone needed a new battery RIGHT NOW!!!
I’ll be using the $29 cut price battery near the end of the year on my 7+ so that I’ll have a good battery as long as possible, It’s current 93% is sufficient to avoid major issues.
Back then, cars came with 2 sets of keys: door/trunk & ignition & the door/trunk key could not be used to start the car. By locking the ignition key in the trunk I could no longer start it nor put it into motion which precluded driving it. The cops that woke me confirmed that by doing so I had taken sufficient measures to avoid a DUI.
Modern cars that start with a button as long as the fob is in range are another matter.
Back when you used to have two separate keys for the trunk and the ignition, I used to lock my ignition keys in the trunk when I had too much to drink. I got woken up by neighbourhood cops a few times, & one time I was patted down & the interior of the car was searched once but that was sufficient to avoid being charged with a DUI in NY in the 80s.
With cars that you can start with a fob I wouldn't want to try it.
Way back when the the legal age for drinking was still 18 I used to sleep in my car in the parking lot behind my favorite bar for a few hours rather than attempt driving inebriated. I always tossed my keys under the spare tire in the trunk before entering the car to avoid just this circumstance as a friend got caught sleeping in his car before me and caught a DUI. I got woken up a few times by the neighbourhood cops but not having any keys on me they couldn't accuse me of attempting to drive.
Folding down the rear seat to crawl into the trunk to grab the keys was better than a DUI...
Precisely. Anyone not using these products (& none of the ESXi installs I've seen do), no vulnerability. However Meltdown & Spectre are a problem for everyone.
Even if they are not in Jail, Verizon/AT&T/etc should forfeit the money they made off these schemes as they were silently complicit in their commission and profited even more than the fraudsters.
Nah, I was among those who never denied that the USG was performing supervision as every country with the means (even those like Germany & France that claimed initially not to) do it too. However, there were a bunch of people screaming "UNCONSTITUTIONAL SEARCHES" to which I & others were answering "neither you nor I nor J Random uni professor get to determine what is/isn't constitutional - that is a job for the courts", but there has yet to be a single finding of this pervasive unconstitutional searches that were claimed. The thing is, supervision of non-U.S. citizens has _never_ been unconstitutional as so many crackpots claimed. The communications of U.S. citizens with non-U.S. citizens under supervision begins the grey zone and communications of these U.S. citizens with other U.S. citizens continues it further. As these searches were being performed under the authorisation of Congress, the executive branch & no courts have outlawed them, they aren't unconstitutional. Obama thought they went too far and congress let the legislation lapse. Trump & the Republicans want it back. I don't think that doing so will be useful but then I'm not an elected member of congress.
I never claimed that the USG cannot search (some) locked iPhones, FBI officials are the ones doing so. You'll certainly come up with some tortured reasoning for determining why we all need to double/triple/quadruplethink the continual statements of pique that FBI officials are directing towards Apple for making unsearchable devices, I feel no such need.
Slashdot Mirror
Competition? Oh, you're _hilarious_. What's the competition for Facebook, hmmm? Google Plus? Tencent?
What's the competition for Slashdot where I'd still get the /. community (which for _some_ subjects is the only reason I haven't completely abandoned /.)?
There is no competition for many of the sites that have been forced into spamming me with cookie authorisation popups, there is just the new reality that given that I'm reading in France there are now many popups that people in other countries don't have to suffer through.
Privatizing ISS isn't what everyone wishes for, it's privatizing access to Space & killing the Senate Launch System.
This is just another tactic to make (some) people argue about ISS to avoid their asking questions about SLS.
Snort, use of cookies is endemic and will not change. Everyone just clicks through the popups so _NOBODY_ changes the websites to not use cookies so the only end result is more annoying popups.
The end result isn't less use of cookies but more annoying popups.
Much like the French judgment that users need to be informed about the use of cookies on websites, all that is going to change in the end is that the users are going to be getting more popups with a refined text that nobody reads to click on to use the services in question.
How do I know this? because it's exactly what I see when connecting to websites that use cookies from France, including Slashdot.
About once a week, when clicking on a frontpage link on Slashdot, I get a "Warning you are in France and need to click on this button stating that you are OK with Slashdot using cookies to track you". It's fracking annoying to tell the truth. Why must I renew my acceptance _EVERY_FRACKING_WEEK?!? Because the stupid law says that "All sites can only keep cookies for a week and must ask again every time the cookie times out".
Clicking every week (which I will do because I want to use Slashdot & that Germans will do because they want to use Facebook) will change precisely nothing but make a bunch of obsessive people who write laws ever so slightly happier.
It's telling that only AC's are claiming that Apple isn't respecting their promise to perform one battery replacement per 6/6S/7 for $29...
Bullshit. Apple replaced the battery on my old battered 6 for $29 without any problems.
Poor poor Assange, _forced_ to dip into the money raised for Manning to get decent Take-Out delivered in London...
I don't blame the Swedes. Their legal system is what it is and shouldn't special case for Assange. They may have dropped the case for the moment but left open the door to re-opening it if Assange becomes available.
As for the Brits, their dedication to not letting that oath breaking, abusive weasel slip out & avoid what is coming to him is admirable.
That the Ecuadorians have realised what an unpleasant person he is and wish he was gone is just karma for their enabling him to avoid justice for so long.
i stand corrected & the original poster was thus complete bull, thanks.
Polanski had also pled guilty and was awaiting sentencing before he jumped bail which is another separate reason for there being no applicable statue of limitations for him.
Assange was allowed to leave Sweden, true, the rest is all lies and half truths.
Assange refused to talk to the Swedish investigators until after the extradition proceedings had finished, broke his pledge to respect the UK's sovereignty (a condition of his being released from custody until the end of the extradition hearings), skipped bail and fled to the Ecuadorian Embassy and then imposed unacceptable preconditions on the investigators (all questions to be submitted before the meeting and Assange gets to choose those he is willing to answer).
His claim that the Swedish charges was a pretext to an extradition from Sweden to the U.S is laughable given that such extradition would be much easier from the U.K and almost impossible from Sweden.
Assange is a sexual predator with a messianic complex who is now stuck in difficult circumstances of his own creation and trying to play the clock to avoid paying for his crimes.
Do you also contribute to Washington state politicians as much as Microsoft does to "ensure a favorable business environment"?
Because I'm thinking that an unhappy Microsoft will be contributing to different politicians or shopping around the country for a new campus the way Amazon has.
TFA has been updated with a statement.
Yeah because who _doesn’t_ want to return to carrying around Motorola DynaTAC sized brick phones... /s
Presumably you also want a Microsoft Surface 3 times as thick so that you can use AA batteries as well.
So, Lawmakers from Washington have outlawed Microsoft's entire Surface line. I'm sure Microsoft will be thrilled.
It's been a while and I don't remember the last time it happened but /. editors used to be able to update the summary text.
It's truly chocking how poor the /. editors have become
Many of those expressing rage with Apple throttling iPhones with older batteries don’t own an iPhone, never did and never will.
All supported devices can get a one time battery replacement for $29 but phones models old enough to be out of support, Samsung phones, cars, boats, planes rocket ships, etc, are out of luck. With the extra demand caused in large part because Apple proposed that special offer, supply is currently tight so Apple is trying to get people that still have >85, 95 and even 95% of initial capacity to wait a little for supplies to be better and not have people with phones have to wait.
And yes, while waiting for Apple to look at my aging rMBP’s battery that only charges to 65% I have personally seen a prick with 95% insist that HIS phone needed a new battery RIGHT NOW!!!
I’ll be using the $29 cut price battery near the end of the year on my 7+ so that I’ll have a good battery as long as possible, It’s current 93% is sufficient to avoid major issues.
Back then, cars came with 2 sets of keys: door/trunk & ignition & the door/trunk key could not be used to start the car. By locking the ignition key in the trunk I could no longer start it nor put it into motion which precluded driving it. The cops that woke me confirmed that by doing so I had taken sufficient measures to avoid a DUI.
Modern cars that start with a button as long as the fob is in range are another matter.
Back when you used to have two separate keys for the trunk and the ignition, I used to lock my ignition keys in the trunk when I had too much to drink. I got woken up by neighbourhood cops a few times, & one time I was patted down & the interior of the car was searched once but that was sufficient to avoid being charged with a DUI in NY in the 80s.
With cars that you can start with a fob I wouldn't want to try it.
Way back when the the legal age for drinking was still 18 I used to sleep in my car in the parking lot behind my favorite bar for a few hours rather than attempt driving inebriated. I always tossed my keys under the spare tire in the trunk before entering the car to avoid just this circumstance as a friend got caught sleeping in his car before me and caught a DUI. I got woken up a few times by the neighbourhood cops but not having any keys on me they couldn't accuse me of attempting to drive.
Folding down the rear seat to crawl into the trunk to grab the keys was better than a DUI...
Precisely. Anyone not using these products (& none of the ESXi installs I've seen do), no vulnerability. However Meltdown & Spectre are a problem for everyone.
Even if they are not in Jail, Verizon/AT&T/etc should forfeit the money they made off these schemes as they were silently complicit in their commission and profited even more than the fraudsters.
Nah, I was among those who never denied that the USG was performing supervision as every country with the means (even those like Germany & France that claimed initially not to) do it too. However, there were a bunch of people screaming "UNCONSTITUTIONAL SEARCHES" to which I & others were answering "neither you nor I nor J Random uni professor get to determine what is/isn't constitutional - that is a job for the courts", but there has yet to be a single finding of this pervasive unconstitutional searches that were claimed. The thing is, supervision of non-U.S. citizens has _never_ been unconstitutional as so many crackpots claimed. The communications of U.S. citizens with non-U.S. citizens under supervision begins the grey zone and communications of these U.S. citizens with other U.S. citizens continues it further. As these searches were being performed under the authorisation of Congress, the executive branch & no courts have outlawed them, they aren't unconstitutional. Obama thought they went too far and congress let the legislation lapse. Trump & the Republicans want it back. I don't think that doing so will be useful but then I'm not an elected member of congress.
I never claimed that the USG cannot search (some) locked iPhones, FBI officials are the ones doing so. You'll certainly come up with some tortured reasoning for determining why we all need to double/triple/quadruplethink the continual statements of pique that FBI officials are directing towards Apple for making unsearchable devices, I feel no such need.