Mobile devics are not better for all consumption. General internet browsing is still much better on the laptop/desktop because of screen size and fine manipulation. I only browse on my phone when I am out and need to browse.
This is what needs to be done. The problem is I don't know how to be successful getting this types of laws passed:
We need to make it so that the government cannot request the data without a court order. The court order should be required to be put into public record within 48 hours of the data transfer. This gives the government enough time to deal with time sensitive arrests while preventing abuse since their actions will shortly be revealed to the public. We need to them make it illegal for corporations to share the data with the government without a aforementioned court order. All employees in charge of gathering the data must see the court order before sharing the data. Breaking these laws should cause all involved, both government officials and corporate employees/managers, to be arrested pending a trial and all data gathered to be useless for prosecution.
1. Incorrect, so long as it kills less people it will be fine.
While I would hope this is true, I would find it more likely that the news media would play the deaths up for their own gain and cause masses to have unfavorable opinions of the technology. A four year old dieing in a firey blaze because of something that the majority would probably already by distrustful of likely cause the technology to be banned or highly contrained, statistics be damned.
So going to a gun range is illegal now? While I realize this guy didn't go to one before flying, it shows this shoudn't be enough to detain him. It might justify running his bags through one more time but not detaining him. If I was him, I would have waited for the police to show up and then asked the officer to arrest the TSA agent for theft since the agent wouldn't reliquish the bag when he said he wanted to leave.
That is why states need to have a majority of the power. It essentially makes them 50 counties with unifying treaties. The closer the government is to the people, the more likely that those people are under a rule that they agree with.
I think Canonical's mistake was limiting the campaign to a single month. I am sure there were a lot of people that wanted the phone but did not have the liquid cash to purchase one with only a month notice. If it was a three month campaign, I could see them reaching their goal.
How did they loose credability? They told us up-front that if the campaign did not reach is funding goal we would get our money back. Meanwhile, everyone gets to see how much demand there is for a Edge-like phone with only a month notice and little paid marketing. In the end, I would say the campaign was successful and we will probably be seeing Edge-like phones being offered within a year or two.
I want to see a study that compares students that take all notes by hand and students that are given the notes before the lecture and then make supplemental notes. I always found note taking distracting from thinking about the lecture but at the same time I always wanted to have a reference so that I know what a professor deems important. From personal experience, I believe being given a set of notes / detailed PowerPoint slides with the option of adding to them is more conducive to retention and understanding.
If the game industry ever moves from putting most of their effort in graphics, graphics, and more graphics, I see no reason why extra cores couldn't be used on improving AI and physics experiences.
I can't specifically name any off the top of my head because I will never frequent such sites but they exist. It has nothing to do with the phone. It has to do with the way they code the site.
I was thinking the same thing. If they made such a product and it was well researched for effective nutrition, I would consider going on such a diet for a few months if it meant almost no prep and I could loose a bunch of fat weight.
Any smart rich person that wants to remain rich will not hoard that much money. When you have millions/billions a 2% loss to inflation tends to be a lot of money. As for the second case, investments are a good thing. They keep the money cycling in the economy. I fail to see the problem there. If you are worried about people in poverty, there are forms of sale tax only taxation that address this. For example, Fair Tax addresses this by defining a poverty level income and then "prebating" the taxes. At the beginning of every month, everyone is given a check that amounts to what a person in poverty would normally pay in sales tax.
I think a prefer the opposite. Abolish the income tax and make a standard sales tax across the board. Plan the shift over several years in order to decrease the immediate impact of the switch.
Companies never pay taxes. They shift that burder to the customer through increased prices. Placing the taxes directly on the end user makes the tax system more transparent.
Without a proxy of some sort, how are you going to prevent websites from tracking you? At the very least, web servers need a IP address to send its content to on request. There is no way for the browser to disable the web server's ability to log that data request. If they can log the data, they can share that data with third-parties in order to get a better idea of the interests of those that IP address. If you want your sessions to persist across mutiple visits/requests from that website, some sort of session id needs to be sent from your browser and then you have the same senario.
As far as I know, most tracking is done via third-party cookies and javascript scripts that log your visits directly. The best you can do in that regard is block those cookies/scripts. Of course, if such a feature was on by default, the tracking/advertising agencies would simply require that the website owners send the information via the server-side and now everyone is worse off because there is nothing you can do about it.
Combine with some tech down the road, Firefox's solution might actually help. By reporting your interests to websites though your pre-processed browser history or manual settings, you decrease the incentive of advertising agencies of spending addtional resources tracking and computing your interests. After wide adoption, Firefox can then start blocking tracking cookies and scripts by default. They could also start onion routing through other Firefox users' browsers. While advertising agencies can still go through the previously mentioned backend route, why spend the resources organizing and developing such a network if they are already getting 99% or what they want unless that 1% is at least as valuable as the resources needed to be spend developing that system? With so much obfuscation it probably isn't worth it.
That is what I was thinking. There are a lot of both emotional and logical reasons to turn the emotions back off. This is especially true if they have already killed, murdered, and/or raped people. Why feel guilty or sad when you don't have to?
Slashdot Mirror
Mobile devics are not better for all consumption. General internet browsing is still much better on the laptop/desktop because of screen size and fine manipulation. I only browse on my phone when I am out and need to browse.
I don't know. The function visualization feature looked pretty cool.
At this resolution, yes probably. At a much higher resolution, it could be quite possible.
Hence a major reason not to federalize a lot of power.
This is what needs to be done. The problem is I don't know how to be successful getting this types of laws passed:
We need to make it so that the government cannot request the data without a court order. The court order should be required to be put into public record within 48 hours of the data transfer. This gives the government enough time to deal with time sensitive arrests while preventing abuse since their actions will shortly be revealed to the public. We need to them make it illegal for corporations to share the data with the government without a aforementioned court order. All employees in charge of gathering the data must see the court order before sharing the data. Breaking these laws should cause all involved, both government officials and corporate employees/managers, to be arrested pending a trial and all data gathered to be useless for prosecution.
The fallback would be to sue afterwards.
1. Incorrect, so long as it kills less people it will be fine.
While I would hope this is true, I would find it more likely that the news media would play the deaths up for their own gain and cause masses to have unfavorable opinions of the technology. A four year old dieing in a firey blaze because of something that the majority would probably already by distrustful of likely cause the technology to be banned or highly contrained, statistics be damned.
I noticed the mispelling after I hit submit. Unfortunately for me, there isn't a edit feature in Slashdot.
So going to a gun range is illegal now? While I realize this guy didn't go to one before flying, it shows this shoudn't be enough to detain him. It might justify running his bags through one more time but not detaining him. If I was him, I would have waited for the police to show up and then asked the officer to arrest the TSA agent for theft since the agent wouldn't reliquish the bag when he said he wanted to leave.
That is why states need to have a majority of the power. It essentially makes them 50 counties with unifying treaties. The closer the government is to the people, the more likely that those people are under a rule that they agree with.
I think Canonical's mistake was limiting the campaign to a single month. I am sure there were a lot of people that wanted the phone but did not have the liquid cash to purchase one with only a month notice. If it was a three month campaign, I could see them reaching their goal.
How did they loose credability? They told us up-front that if the campaign did not reach is funding goal we would get our money back. Meanwhile, everyone gets to see how much demand there is for a Edge-like phone with only a month notice and little paid marketing. In the end, I would say the campaign was successful and we will probably be seeing Edge-like phones being offered within a year or two.
I want to see a study that compares students that take all notes by hand and students that are given the notes before the lecture and then make supplemental notes. I always found note taking distracting from thinking about the lecture but at the same time I always wanted to have a reference so that I know what a professor deems important. From personal experience, I believe being given a set of notes / detailed PowerPoint slides with the option of adding to them is more conducive to retention and understanding.
So in other words, Microsoft did this.
Why not 100%?
If the game industry ever moves from putting most of their effort in graphics, graphics, and more graphics, I see no reason why extra cores couldn't be used on improving AI and physics experiences.
I will have to check that out. I am currently using Chrome as my mobile browser.
I can't specifically name any off the top of my head because I will never frequent such sites but they exist. It has nothing to do with the phone. It has to do with the way they code the site.
I was thinking the same thing. If they made such a product and it was well researched for effective nutrition, I would consider going on such a diet for a few months if it meant almost no prep and I could loose a bunch of fat weight.
The wealthy consume goods and service along with everyone else. I am confused why you keep on saying the wealthy would not be taxed.
Any smart rich person that wants to remain rich will not hoard that much money. When you have millions/billions a 2% loss to inflation tends to be a lot of money. As for the second case, investments are a good thing. They keep the money cycling in the economy. I fail to see the problem there. If you are worried about people in poverty, there are forms of sale tax only taxation that address this. For example, Fair Tax addresses this by defining a poverty level income and then "prebating" the taxes. At the beginning of every month, everyone is given a check that amounts to what a person in poverty would normally pay in sales tax.
I think a prefer the opposite. Abolish the income tax and make a standard sales tax across the board. Plan the shift over several years in order to decrease the immediate impact of the switch.
Companies never pay taxes. They shift that burder to the customer through increased prices. Placing the taxes directly on the end user makes the tax system more transparent.
You obviously did not read past my first sentence.
Without a proxy of some sort, how are you going to prevent websites from tracking you? At the very least, web servers need a IP address to send its content to on request. There is no way for the browser to disable the web server's ability to log that data request. If they can log the data, they can share that data with third-parties in order to get a better idea of the interests of those that IP address. If you want your sessions to persist across mutiple visits/requests from that website, some sort of session id needs to be sent from your browser and then you have the same senario.
As far as I know, most tracking is done via third-party cookies and javascript scripts that log your visits directly. The best you can do in that regard is block those cookies/scripts. Of course, if such a feature was on by default, the tracking/advertising agencies would simply require that the website owners send the information via the server-side and now everyone is worse off because there is nothing you can do about it.
Combine with some tech down the road, Firefox's solution might actually help. By reporting your interests to websites though your pre-processed browser history or manual settings, you decrease the incentive of advertising agencies of spending addtional resources tracking and computing your interests. After wide adoption, Firefox can then start blocking tracking cookies and scripts by default. They could also start onion routing through other Firefox users' browsers. While advertising agencies can still go through the previously mentioned backend route, why spend the resources organizing and developing such a network if they are already getting 99% or what they want unless that 1% is at least as valuable as the resources needed to be spend developing that system? With so much obfuscation it probably isn't worth it.
That is what I was thinking. There are a lot of both emotional and logical reasons to turn the emotions back off. This is especially true if they have already killed, murdered, and/or raped people. Why feel guilty or sad when you don't have to?