It's also patented. But they want it to be industry standard? Aren't those two at odds with one another? Making it both open source and industry standard would be a better combination.
I didn't say anything about government licensing, registration or inspection. Only about mandatory fines. Inspection could be done privately, similarly to voluntarily getting a UL sticker -- which says a lot about your product.
If you product causes a fire, your company is to blame. It should be similarly for IoT devices used for hacking. If you make a device that is hacked and used to cause damage, your company is to blame just as much as if your device caused the building to burn down. What is so difficult to understand about this? Companies should make unsafe products. If you can't, then get out of the way for the next guy who can.
Don't blame the voters. No matter who is elected, they will be corrupted by money once enough of it comes their way. Blame the puppet masters for corrupting the system.
Senator Ron Wyden wants nationwide all-mail voting to counter hacking threats.
Donald Trump wants nationwide all-male voting to counter female voting threats.
Maybe the cost needs to be a government fine. That way it has a guarantee of financial impact. No uncertainty about whether a lawsuit will be filed, or whether it will be won. And a private party does not have to bear the cost of initiating the lawsuit.
Simply have a statutory damages for manufacturing an IoT device that has been used in an attack. The device you made was used in an attack. You have to pay the fine. Simple as that.
Now to make devices more secure there could be something like a process of getting an "Underwriter's Laboratories" type seal of approval. The seal doesn't mean an appliance won't burn your house down, just that it is very, very unlikely. Unlikely enough to suit the insurance underwriters. Which raises the subject of insurance -- for liability of getting fined for building an unsafe device.
It seems like this would work. Just like electrical devices are pretty safe -- even though manufacturers have a built in incentive to build them as cheaply and unsafely as possible.
A monitor has economic value long after the computer it's connected to becomes hopelessly obsolete. (to sidetrack: in the case of Apple, that obsolescence is artificially short.)
Consider. Last time, Microsoft friggin' bought Nokia, and the black hole of Windows Phone completely destroyed Nokia in its wake. Nokia made only Windows phones, because, Microsoft. Thousands of people lost their jobs. But if it's not in America, then who notices. But many companies have been destroyed in the wake of Microsoft over the decades. And not because they couldn't build something better, but rather, because they could.
I for one very much want to see Microsoft take another go at phones.
And lose even more money than they did last time.
Last time they poured billions and billions of dollars down this black hole. Ballmer brilliantly laughed at iPhone and Android and waited until it was way, waaay too late. Then they introduced Win Phony 7. Then obsoleted it with Win Phony 8. And just for fun made it incompatible with the Win Phone 7 apps, because they love developers.
The Surface itself was Ballmer's master stroke of genius. In one single step, he alienated all OEMs, App Developers and Customers. OEMs because he back stabbed them by competing with them on hardware. App developers because of app store conditions, and the fact that without a customer base you can't actually expect to sell any apps. And without apps you won't get a customer base. (Welcome to not being the dominant player, the position you put everyone else into back in the 80's and 90's) And back stabbed customers because, well, it sucked. No apps. Very fast obsolescence. How good the initial hardware is is IRRELEVANT.
It is both. A joke. And true. All true, not partly true.
The only sense in which it may be partly true is this. In a single visit to a theater, you may only have to be subjected to a subset of the items I mentioned.
I mentioned Amazon, and a Rental fee. That rental fee could be about the portion of what the studio would get from a theater ticket sale. It seems they would make their money back. Maybe even more.
Are more people likely to watch it online or endure the "movie magic" experience? Especially of the streaming "rental" Amazon price is less than a theater ticket?
But screaming kids, people getting up and squeezing out through the row of seats, and then back again later, and cell phones, and people talking, and telling their life story, along with narrating the film, people kicking the back of your seat, throwing popcorn . . .
It's all part of the movie magic! The theater experience. You wouldn't want to get less than you paid for.
And let's not forget being treated like a criminal before admission into the dignity of the theater experience. And 45 minutes of ads.
One more thing I'll add. Tell the theater owners that due to release windows, the movie must first show on Amazon for 90 days before it can be released to theaters. See how they like the shoe on the other foot.
I remember something about the Goose and the Gander having compatible ports, where no adapter is required to use the same cable on either one. Or something like that.
> Each movie studio would like to "break the oligopoly" of the theaters,
Yeah, right. If that were true, then the studios would EMBRACE online streaming instead of trying to hold it back in every conceivable way.
Hey dinosaur studios, here's an innovative idea: Try releasing one of your good films to online streaming FIRST -- even with a rental price, like on Amazon. And maybe several of you do the same. Then let's see if the theater owners come begging to you to show at their theaters first. Choosing where to release your movies first is not anti-trust, it's just good business. Getting with the modern age. Advancing into the 1990's, etc.
Secret Courts
Secret Laws
Secret Interpretations of Laws
Secret Court Orders
Secret Warrants
Secret Arrests (in the middle of the night)
Secret Evidence (that the defense does not have access to)
Secret Trials
Secret Convictions
Secret Prisons
Secret Um . . . we call it . . . Enhanced Interrogation Techniques
Let's not forget Yahoo's wonderful account creation process. Until a few years ago, one could create unlimited numbers of accounts. When the news of hundreds of millions of accounts being hacked was announced, there were no doubt some people who wondered: how many of my accounts are included in that, and what percent of those 500 million accounts are my accounts.
I wish Microsoft had bought Yahoo for $40 Billion. It would have drained Microsoft's resources to do more evil. And the cultural as well as technical clash would have been entertainment for years and years.
Slashdot Mirror
It is childish and unprofessional to call it spyware. The proper grown up name for it is Windows 10.
And here I thought the reason the internet was unreadable was because of trolls.
And Windows 10.
It's not just science denying idiots. It's Microsoft fanboys too.
Apple isn't happy the the state of TV, or the state of anything unless they control it all. But then the same is true of Microsoft.
It's also patented. But they want it to be industry standard? Aren't those two at odds with one another? Making it both open source and industry standard would be a better combination.
That may be, but Comcast has customer service!
I didn't say anything about government licensing, registration or inspection. Only about mandatory fines. Inspection could be done privately, similarly to voluntarily getting a UL sticker -- which says a lot about your product.
If you product causes a fire, your company is to blame. It should be similarly for IoT devices used for hacking. If you make a device that is hacked and used to cause damage, your company is to blame just as much as if your device caused the building to burn down. What is so difficult to understand about this? Companies should make unsafe products. If you can't, then get out of the way for the next guy who can.
Don't blame the voters. No matter who is elected, they will be corrupted by money once enough of it comes their way. Blame the puppet masters for corrupting the system.
Senator Ron Wyden wants nationwide all-mail voting to counter hacking threats.
Donald Trump wants nationwide all-male voting to counter female voting threats.
Maybe the cost needs to be a government fine. That way it has a guarantee of financial impact. No uncertainty about whether a lawsuit will be filed, or whether it will be won. And a private party does not have to bear the cost of initiating the lawsuit.
Simply have a statutory damages for manufacturing an IoT device that has been used in an attack. The device you made was used in an attack. You have to pay the fine. Simple as that.
Now to make devices more secure there could be something like a process of getting an "Underwriter's Laboratories" type seal of approval. The seal doesn't mean an appliance won't burn your house down, just that it is very, very unlikely. Unlikely enough to suit the insurance underwriters. Which raises the subject of insurance -- for liability of getting fined for building an unsafe device.
It seems like this would work. Just like electrical devices are pretty safe -- even though manufacturers have a built in incentive to build them as cheaply and unsafely as possible.
A monitor has economic value long after the computer it's connected to becomes hopelessly obsolete. (to sidetrack: in the case of Apple, that obsolescence is artificially short.)
Consider. Last time, Microsoft friggin' bought Nokia, and the black hole of Windows Phone completely destroyed Nokia in its wake. Nokia made only Windows phones, because, Microsoft. Thousands of people lost their jobs. But if it's not in America, then who notices. But many companies have been destroyed in the wake of Microsoft over the decades. And not because they couldn't build something better, but rather, because they could.
I for one very much want to see Microsoft take another go at phones.
And lose even more money than they did last time.
Last time they poured billions and billions of dollars down this black hole. Ballmer brilliantly laughed at iPhone and Android and waited until it was way, waaay too late. Then they introduced Win Phony 7. Then obsoleted it with Win Phony 8. And just for fun made it incompatible with the Win Phone 7 apps, because they love developers.
The Surface itself was Ballmer's master stroke of genius. In one single step, he alienated all OEMs, App Developers and Customers. OEMs because he back stabbed them by competing with them on hardware. App developers because of app store conditions, and the fact that without a customer base you can't actually expect to sell any apps. And without apps you won't get a customer base. (Welcome to not being the dominant player, the position you put everyone else into back in the 80's and 90's) And back stabbed customers because, well, it sucked. No apps. Very fast obsolescence. How good the initial hardware is is IRRELEVANT.
It is both. A joke. And true. All true, not partly true.
The only sense in which it may be partly true is this. In a single visit to a theater, you may only have to be subjected to a subset of the items I mentioned.
I mentioned Amazon, and a Rental fee. That rental fee could be about the portion of what the studio would get from a theater ticket sale. It seems they would make their money back. Maybe even more.
Are more people likely to watch it online or endure the "movie magic" experience? Especially of the streaming "rental" Amazon price is less than a theater ticket?
But screaming kids, people getting up and squeezing out through the row of seats, and then back again later, and cell phones, and people talking, and telling their life story, along with narrating the film, people kicking the back of your seat, throwing popcorn . . .
It's all part of the movie magic! The theater experience. You wouldn't want to get less than you paid for.
And let's not forget being treated like a criminal before admission into the dignity of the theater experience. And 45 minutes of ads.
One more thing I'll add. Tell the theater owners that due to release windows, the movie must first show on Amazon for 90 days before it can be released to theaters. See how they like the shoe on the other foot.
I remember something about the Goose and the Gander having compatible ports, where no adapter is required to use the same cable on either one. Or something like that.
But according to TFA (the friendly article), . . .
> Each movie studio would like to "break the oligopoly" of the theaters,
Yeah, right. If that were true, then the studios would EMBRACE online streaming instead of trying to hold it back in every conceivable way.
Hey dinosaur studios, here's an innovative idea: Try releasing one of your good films to online streaming FIRST -- even with a rental price, like on Amazon. And maybe several of you do the same. Then let's see if the theater owners come begging to you to show at their theaters first. Choosing where to release your movies first is not anti-trust, it's just good business. Getting with the modern age. Advancing into the 1990's, etc.
Maybe he can given one more term in office.
It's not just secret courts.
Secret Courts
Secret Laws
Secret Interpretations of Laws
Secret Court Orders
Secret Warrants
Secret Arrests (in the middle of the night)
Secret Evidence (that the defense does not have access to)
Secret Trials
Secret Convictions
Secret Prisons
Secret Um . . . we call it . . . Enhanced Interrogation Techniques
When you start writing something like that, you can expect the government to cut you off in mid sen
Let's not forget Yahoo's wonderful account creation process. Until a few years ago, one could create unlimited numbers of accounts. When the news of hundreds of millions of accounts being hacked was announced, there were no doubt some people who wondered: how many of my accounts are included in that, and what percent of those 500 million accounts are my accounts.
I wish Microsoft had bought Yahoo for $40 Billion. It would have drained Microsoft's resources to do more evil. And the cultural as well as technical clash would have been entertainment for years and years.
Trump? Not likely.
The most likely next president is either President Clinton, or President Obama.
Oh, and also possibly Hillary. So that's three possibilities.
How do you manage to sleep at night?
Do you need to take prescription sleeping pills? Have they had any price increases in the several thousand percent range?
If it can see street signs, and obey them, then recognizing a WRONG WAY sign should indicate that the car needs to turn around ASAP.