What exactly is that, and how did it start? Was it BJ's personal harem where he could pluck out the various women he hunted, like Monica?
More seriously, WTF was the White House (read Obama) doing summoning Mattel execs about how they make their dolls? In the Middle East, there is ISIS run amuk, in the US, Obamacare is almost bust, and this White House has nothing better to do than micromanage the pastime of half the population? I know he's a lame duck, but if there are no hot issues that he really cares about (since he's exposed as a total loser in Foreign Policy, letting the Russians walk over him in not just Syria but Iraq as well), can't he just sit in the White House and plan his retirement, instead of telling toy companies how they should design their dolls?
It's to refocus attention on shit that doesn't matter instead of shit that he doesn't get done.
I love to hate on Comcast as much as anyone, but the quote in the summary really was taken out of context.
There's also this: "If a customer calls in with any questions associated with the usage policy and how it relates to Net Neutrality, Netflix or observations about how XFINITY services are or are not counted relative to third party services, do not address these items with the customer."
The full quote from the document is:
Third Party Services: If a customer calls in with any questions associated with the usage policy and how it relates to Net Neutrality, Netflix or observations about how XFINITY services are or are not counted relative to third party services, do not address these items with the consumer. Immediately escalate to the Customer Security Assurance (CAS) Team.
Leaving off the last sentence escalating the call to someone who is more thoroughly trained in how to bullshit the customer changes the narrative. Without it, it sounds like the policy is to just ignore the customer.
Although it does beg the question of why customers with such questions would be redirected to the anti-fraud group.
"The Customer Security Assurance organization has been established to ensure a safe and secure online experience for Comcast customers. This team is a dedicated group of security professionals who respond to issues pertaining to phishing, spam, infected PCs (commonly referred to as "bots"), online fraud and other security issues."
> Well, it's their fucking system. You play by their rules, or you go play somewhere else. No. Not when said company has a local monopoly on broadband. This is exactly when you should have an issue with it.
Actually you should have an issue with whatever legal authority allowed or mandated the monopoly.
The company is just the symptom, not the root cause.
"shortening patent length on future drugs limits those profits. It won't stop drug development, but it certainly would reduce it"
Reduce it versus what? The point of the article is that at this point pharma doesn't have much interest at all in new drug development.
Shortening patent length would force innovation as the drug companies could only count on raping people for a few short years instead of basically forever per new drug developed.
This is what happens when you allow sociopaths to run corporations. Sociopaths should, upon discovery, be forceably removed from society at gunpoint and sent to an island together where they can fuck each other, eat each other, or whatever it is these vile neurologically inhuman monsters do to each other. No sociopath should ever have control of even a single normal, empathic human being in even the tiniest way.,
Is the problem the CEOs...or the infrastructure of society that gives them power?
As long as there are corporations, there will be sociopaths to run them.
This is such an over-reach, especially the intellectual property parts, it's going to lead to mass civil disobedience in the form of a fundamental attitudinal shift from one of basically respecting the law to one of basically disrespecting it *on the part of everyone* including society's intellectuals, academics and cultural leaders.
That's the deeper danger of this kind of law making, not to mention the content of the law itself. It leads to contempt for the law, contempt for Congress , the Executive and the Judiciary. Contempt leads to mass, defacto civil disobedience where ignoring or subverting the law becomes the norm, as in the days of prohibition.
How is this good for the country?
It's not good for the country - it's good for the American nobility.
"Personally I'd rather the USA stay the worlds richest nation! That is almost certain to be whats best for me, my family, and my friends. I have no desire to try and hold any other nation down or prevent the expansion of the middle class around the world. Good luck to them, but I see no reason we need to give away what's ours to enable that. Now some lefties are going to return to say we unfairly came by what we have. Yes okay maybe if you want to say we took the land from the Natives, but other than that no not really if you look at the whole of those situations and the alternatives."
How about a middle ground where the West doesn't lose quality of life and the rest of the world catches up?
The question is one of speed. If the imbalance is slow enough for the west to adjust to, then we remain unharmed.
Of course that's not what's happening as all the corporations take advantage of doing as much as they can to reduce labor costs (and shift the benefits to tax havens but that's another story) as fast as they can.
Protectionism is a good way to make an economy poor. People have this ideal that they'll make twice as much salary and have a bigger piece of the pie, except they don't realize the pie just gets smaller.
Lack of some protectionism sees job flight (incoming by visa or outgoing by overseas outsourcing) - especially in today's world. When you're unable to get work you'll be reconsidering your position on this.
I'll draw your attention to the successful civil rights movement, which took a long time and a LOT of protesting.
It took a lot of civil disobedience, arrests, etc. but at the end of the day we now have a black sitting president - something completely impossible to imagine 70 years ago.
When enough people become in bad enough shape, then a revolution of some sort will occur. It may be civil disobedience or it may be all out revolution, depending on how long it takes to get to a boil and what steps are taken by those in power to keep things from boiling over.
Gods no. The important thing is that the cable be capable of carrying the current the device requests. If the resistors were just in the device, then it would have no idea if the cable you've used to connect it to the hub is thick enough to carry the current it is about to draw.
Or you could just make all USB-C cables capable of carrying the max current that the USB-C standard supports.
It doesn't. The summary makes this app sound like some kind of worm or trojan but it is neither. This is "propagated" by deliberate peer to peer transfer via Android Beam or sideloading. The purpose is to provide killswitch-proof and jackboot-resistant mesh networking for hippies/activists/terrorists.
Does seem that it would be a good vector for malware embedded in a compromised copy though.
La Courneuve is a relatively poor area near (not in) Paris. If this were in, say, Neuilly-sur-Seine, which is also near (not in) Paris but happens to house, among others, former president Nicolas Sarkozy, it would never have been built to start with.
Unfortunately, we don't have the same vetting process for political candidates. So, if a candidate has preemptively put everything out there and answers all questions, just how are they going to be doxxed? It's the same as having a secret that you don't want your boss to know (maybe you're gay or whatever) and someone tries to blackmail you. Tell the boss, the blackmailer now has no leverage.
You're assuming the dox to be something truthful. And before you say that if it's not truthful that the politician could just deny it - it just doesn't work that way (ie Obama and his birth certificate).
Your example proves otherwise - Obama got elected twice, and anyone still following the "birther" agenda is regarded as a kook.
More than a decade something like that happened to me. I can remember the agent on the other end rebutting one of my points with the statement, "I am unaware of any applicable usury laws in the state of Colorado." That's when I knew I was in trouble.
Later I found out the rate spike hadn't been solely due to one late payment, but also due to a student loan that was supposed to be in deferral but messed up my credit rating before the paperwork cleared. Amazingly, once it did clear up, I was able to successfully argue with the credit card company that they had not properly informed me of the reasons for the rate hike. I not only got them to lower the rate back from 30%+ to something closer to 12%, but also got them to refund several months worth of inappropriate interest. Honestly, I'm still amazed I got that through the system. They gave me a ton of runaround and were repeatedly late following up on things (once even blaming a multi-week delay on a snow storm in North Dakota, as if snowstorms up there in midwinter were somehow an unusual thing). It took a ton of patience and documentation and pushing them.
I found it easier to close the account and move to another country.
Unfortunately, we don't have the same vetting process for political candidates. So, if a candidate has preemptively put everything out there and answers all questions, just how are they going to be doxxed? It's the same as having a secret that you don't want your boss to know (maybe you're gay or whatever) and someone tries to blackmail you. Tell the boss, the blackmailer now has no leverage.
You're assuming the dox to be something truthful. And before you say that if it's not truthful that the politician could just deny it - it just doesn't work that way (ie Obama and his birth certificate).
Lets put more context. Here a house to get started costs a lot more than most people can afford in life. So everybody uses loans, but it is a debt to at least 15 years in a Third World country where the rules change at the whim of those who really rule the country (bankers and wealthy foreigners). Usually people here buy houses anyway because they are too naive (or too stupid) to take into account all these factors, and end up without the money paid and without the house in the first accident to happen (change of employment, unemployment, change of government, etc). Of course you can get lucky and nothing happens to you in your turn to buy, but I honestly do not like to relying on luck.
Short version: It is far more risky in a third world country.
I actually assumed you were talking about the US, as it seems more or less the same set of conditions.
Chase is a nationally chartered bank, so they can essentially ignore the usury laws in your state.
No, they cannot. Rather, they can break the law and count on most people not bothering to contest it but regardless of where they are based or do business, if they are selling something in a given state they have to follow the laws of that state.
my understanding of the way it works here in France is that banks, et. al. can lend you as much as they choose to but they can't collect debt that you can't pay if they've loaned you more than you can pay back with 30% of your income. End result is that the banks balk at lending that exceeds that 30% soft limit.
Then how do student loans work? Where I live, child labor laws ensure that someone fresh out of high school (which the French call lycée) is unlikely to have enough work experience to have a large enough income to afford a loan to pay for university.
Sit down first...
University is almost free here, so there is no need for student loans.
Slashdot Mirror
What exactly is that, and how did it start? Was it BJ's personal harem where he could pluck out the various women he hunted, like Monica?
More seriously, WTF was the White House (read Obama) doing summoning Mattel execs about how they make their dolls? In the Middle East, there is ISIS run amuk, in the US, Obamacare is almost bust, and this White House has nothing better to do than micromanage the pastime of half the population? I know he's a lame duck, but if there are no hot issues that he really cares about (since he's exposed as a total loser in Foreign Policy, letting the Russians walk over him in not just Syria but Iraq as well), can't he just sit in the White House and plan his retirement, instead of telling toy companies how they should design their dolls?
It's to refocus attention on shit that doesn't matter instead of shit that he doesn't get done.
I love to hate on Comcast as much as anyone, but the quote in the summary really was taken out of context.
The full quote from the document is:
Leaving off the last sentence escalating the call to someone who is more thoroughly trained in how to bullshit the customer changes the narrative. Without it, it sounds like the policy is to just ignore the customer.
Although it does beg the question of why customers with such questions would be redirected to the anti-fraud group.
"The Customer Security Assurance organization has been established to ensure a safe and secure online experience for Comcast customers. This team is a dedicated group of security professionals who respond to issues pertaining to phishing, spam, infected PCs (commonly referred to as "bots"), online fraud and other security issues."
when 640k got you a lot!
Youngster.
Remembering when I had to get that USR 14400 cause it was so much faster than the 9600...bps
> Well, it's their fucking system. You play by their rules, or you go play somewhere else.
No. Not when said company has a local monopoly on broadband. This is exactly when you should have an issue with it.
Actually you should have an issue with whatever legal authority allowed or mandated the monopoly.
The company is just the symptom, not the root cause.
"shortening patent length on future drugs limits those profits. It won't stop drug development, but it certainly would reduce it"
Reduce it versus what? The point of the article is that at this point pharma doesn't have much interest at all in new drug development.
Shortening patent length would force innovation as the drug companies could only count on raping people for a few short years instead of basically forever per new drug developed.
This is what happens when you allow sociopaths to run corporations. Sociopaths should, upon discovery, be forceably removed from society at gunpoint and sent to an island together where they can fuck each other, eat each other, or whatever it is these vile neurologically inhuman monsters do to each other. No sociopath should ever have control of even a single normal, empathic human being in even the tiniest way.,
Is the problem the CEOs...or the infrastructure of society that gives them power?
As long as there are corporations, there will be sociopaths to run them.
This sets a precedent now so everyone knows not to pay hostage money to people that threaten DDOS attacks as they don't follow through honorably.
There were evidently two groups of attackers. Quite possibly one stopped and the other one wasn't after money to start with.
Does seem that it would be a good vector for malware embedded in a compromised copy though.
No more so than any app that is discovered by "word of mouth" and downloaded from someone's website -- or passed around from user to user.
By the way, here is a link to an amazing app I found on the web. It's really cool, give it a try and let me know how you like it!
True except perhaps for the target demographic, but yes I agree -
This is such an over-reach, especially the intellectual property parts, it's going to lead to mass civil disobedience in the form of a fundamental attitudinal shift from one of basically respecting the law to one of basically disrespecting it *on the part of everyone* including society's intellectuals, academics and cultural leaders.
That's the deeper danger of this kind of law making, not to mention the content of the law itself. It leads to contempt for the law, contempt for Congress , the Executive and the Judiciary. Contempt leads to mass, defacto civil disobedience where ignoring or subverting the law becomes the norm, as in the days of prohibition.
How is this good for the country?
It's not good for the country - it's good for the American nobility.
"Personally I'd rather the USA stay the worlds richest nation! That is almost certain to be whats best for me, my family, and my friends. I have no desire to try and hold any other nation down or prevent the expansion of the middle class around the world. Good luck to them, but I see no reason we need to give away what's ours to enable that. Now some lefties are going to return to say we unfairly came by what we have. Yes okay maybe if you want to say we took the land from the Natives, but other than that no not really if you look at the whole of those situations and the alternatives."
How about a middle ground where the West doesn't lose quality of life and the rest of the world catches up?
The question is one of speed. If the imbalance is slow enough for the west to adjust to, then we remain unharmed.
Of course that's not what's happening as all the corporations take advantage of doing as much as they can to reduce labor costs (and shift the benefits to tax havens but that's another story) as fast as they can.
Protectionism is a good way to make an economy poor. People have this ideal that they'll make twice as much salary and have a bigger piece of the pie, except they don't realize the pie just gets smaller.
Lack of some protectionism sees job flight (incoming by visa or outgoing by overseas outsourcing) - especially in today's world. When you're unable to get work you'll be reconsidering your position on this.
"Protests are a laughable waste of time"
I'll draw your attention to the successful civil rights movement, which took a long time and a LOT of protesting.
It took a lot of civil disobedience, arrests, etc. but at the end of the day we now have a black sitting president - something completely impossible to imagine 70 years ago.
When enough people become in bad enough shape, then a revolution of some sort will occur. It may be civil disobedience or it may be all out revolution, depending on how long it takes to get to a boil and what steps are taken by those in power to keep things from boiling over.
Gods no. The important thing is that the cable be capable of carrying the current the device requests. If the resistors were just in the device, then it would have no idea if the cable you've used to connect it to the hub is thick enough to carry the current it is about to draw.
Or you could just make all USB-C cables capable of carrying the max current that the USB-C standard supports.
Having a cable format dependent on a resistor in the cable sounds like a poor design to me.
++ since it could damage hardware.
If your motivation is to lock customers into your ecosystem then you do this in as proprietary a fashion as you can get away with.
So for the business, it's a great design.
It doesn't. The summary makes this app sound like some kind of worm or trojan but it is neither. This is "propagated" by deliberate peer to peer transfer via Android Beam or sideloading. The purpose is to provide killswitch-proof and jackboot-resistant mesh networking for hippies/activists/terrorists.
Does seem that it would be a good vector for malware embedded in a compromised copy though.
La Courneuve is a relatively poor area near (not in) Paris. If this were in, say, Neuilly-sur-Seine, which is also near (not in) Paris but happens to house, among others, former president Nicolas Sarkozy, it would never have been built to start with.
La Courneuve Wiki
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Neuilly Wiki
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
^^
Excellent :-D
Unfortunately, we don't have the same vetting process for political candidates. So, if a candidate has preemptively put everything out there and answers all questions, just how are they going to be doxxed? It's the same as having a secret that you don't want your boss to know (maybe you're gay or whatever) and someone tries to blackmail you. Tell the boss, the blackmailer now has no leverage.
You're assuming the dox to be something truthful. And before you say that if it's not truthful that the politician could just deny it - it just doesn't work that way (ie Obama and his birth certificate).
Your example proves otherwise - Obama got elected twice, and anyone still following the "birther" agenda is regarded as a kook.
No, your logic is inaccurate.
Read this, in particular the use of "rumor bombs":
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Lose the votes to whom? Democrats? Not the racist vote...
How about a democratic candidate (or president as the case may be) that tries to refute the validity of his American birth certificate?
The reality is that sheeple just don't do much fact checking. They start off with bias and eagerly swallow anything that reinforces it.
More than a decade something like that happened to me. I can remember the agent on the other end rebutting one of my points with the statement, "I am unaware of any applicable usury laws in the state of Colorado." That's when I knew I was in trouble.
Later I found out the rate spike hadn't been solely due to one late payment, but also due to a student loan that was supposed to be in deferral but messed up my credit rating before the paperwork cleared. Amazingly, once it did clear up, I was able to successfully argue with the credit card company that they had not properly informed me of the reasons for the rate hike. I not only got them to lower the rate back from 30%+ to something closer to 12%, but also got them to refund several months worth of inappropriate interest. Honestly, I'm still amazed I got that through the system. They gave me a ton of runaround and were repeatedly late following up on things (once even blaming a multi-week delay on a snow storm in North Dakota, as if snowstorms up there in midwinter were somehow an unusual thing). It took a ton of patience and documentation and pushing them.
I found it easier to close the account and move to another country.
Unfortunately, we don't have the same vetting process for political candidates. So, if a candidate has preemptively put everything out there and answers all questions, just how are they going to be doxxed? It's the same as having a secret that you don't want your boss to know (maybe you're gay or whatever) and someone tries to blackmail you. Tell the boss, the blackmailer now has no leverage.
You're assuming the dox to be something truthful. And before you say that if it's not truthful that the politician could just deny it - it just doesn't work that way (ie Obama and his birth certificate).
Lets put more context. Here a house to get started costs a lot more than most people can afford in life. So everybody uses loans, but it is a debt to at least 15 years in a Third World country where the rules change at the whim of those who really rule the country (bankers and wealthy foreigners). Usually people here buy houses anyway because they are too naive (or too stupid) to take into account all these factors, and end up without the money paid and without the house in the first accident to happen (change of employment, unemployment, change of government, etc). Of course you can get lucky and nothing happens to you in your turn to buy, but I honestly do not like to relying on luck.
Short version: It is far more risky in a third world country.
I actually assumed you were talking about the US, as it seems more or less the same set of conditions.
Non-STEM people just can't concentrate because they have the attention span of a gnat, that's why they call the thinkers autistic.
Sorry did you
Chase is a nationally chartered bank, so they can essentially ignore the usury laws in your state.
No, they cannot. Rather, they can break the law and count on most people not bothering to contest it but regardless of where they are based or do business, if they are selling something in a given state they have to follow the laws of that state.
my understanding of the way it works here in France is that banks, et. al. can lend you as much as they choose to but they can't collect debt that you can't pay if they've loaned you more than you can pay back with 30% of your income. End result is that the banks balk at lending that exceeds that 30% soft limit.
Then how do student loans work? Where I live, child labor laws ensure that someone fresh out of high school (which the French call lycée ) is unlikely to have enough work experience to have a large enough income to afford a loan to pay for university.
Sit down first...
University is almost free here, so there is no need for student loans.