Well first I doubt they all have an iPhone. But if they do, and they can't afford a PC, they are pretty dumb. The iPhone is the most expensive phone out there. But anyways, I was talking about younger people. They live with their parents. If their parents buy them a personal smartphone, but not a PC for the whole family, they made the wrong choice.
404 not found for the first link. The second is irrelevant and doesn't back your claim. China has more population, and a higher population density. It doesn't mean they pollute more per capita.
Well, I agree that many people buy/lease cars which are too expensive for their income. Rich people should buy cars outright. However I understand that poor people can't easily spend $20k at once on a car. Ideally, they should be saving until they have $20k (or get a cheaper car), but they might need the car sooner (to go to work) therefore I understand it may not be practical.
But you should never get a loan of $700 for a luxury phone.
you can't afford it monthly either. Seriously, Altough it is damn expensive for a phone, it is really cheap compared to a car or a house. I don't see why anyone would need to finance it. If you do, you should be buying a cheaper phone anyways.
According to the administrative law judge who heard the first appeal, Uber has sole discretion over fares, and can charge drivers a cancellation fee if they choose not to take a ride, prohibit drivers from picking up passengers not using the app and suspend or deactivate drivers' accounts.
Based on that, "there was in fact an employer/employee relationship", according to the decision.
I agree with the judge on one point: if they were independent contractors, they would be free to pickup passengers not using Uber.
Yup. But by the time oil is produced by the Earth from the CO2 within the atmosphere, it will be way too late for the climate. A tree can grow quickly enough, so that's not that much of an issue.
Exactly. That's why I don't understand why SPF 30 could be enough. If SPF 60 is the same price and offers twice the protection, why not? Also, they sell some SPF 110 here, maybe even higher.
I don't think anyone but Apple can verify what effective type of encryption is used. It might be flawed or insecure, who knows? The end-to-end is controlled by Apple and closed-source.
Whatsapp will die soon one way or another. There isn't any closed, proprietary communication protocol that survived the years (think about phone, email, telegraph, they are all open standards). The sooner the better. The whole point of these protocols is to have total reachability. If there are dozens of competing, closed messaging apps, it will suck as none of them will allow to contact everyone.
Slashdot Mirror
Well first I doubt they all have an iPhone. But if they do, and they can't afford a PC, they are pretty dumb. The iPhone is the most expensive phone out there.
But anyways, I was talking about younger people. They live with their parents. If their parents buy them a personal smartphone, but not a PC for the whole family, they made the wrong choice.
What we're seeing is that a lot of former GNU/Linux users are now using one or more of the BSDs
Citation needed.
The FSF and GNU existed before.
Also if they get caught by Uber they may be fired.
If Uber allowed that, they'd be allowing street hails, which would in effect make them a taxi company.
Not the judge problem.
I would also say that they are already a taxi company.
404 not found for the first link.
The second is irrelevant and doesn't back your claim. China has more population, and a higher population density. It doesn't mean they pollute more per capita.
What I said applies to both financing and leasing.
Well, I agree that many people buy/lease cars which are too expensive for their income.
Rich people should buy cars outright. However I understand that poor people can't easily spend $20k at once on a car. Ideally, they should be saving until they have $20k (or get a cheaper car), but they might need the car sooner (to go to work) therefore I understand it may not be practical.
But you should never get a loan of $700 for a luxury phone.
you can't afford it monthly either. Seriously, Altough it is damn expensive for a phone, it is really cheap compared to a car or a house. I don't see why anyone would need to finance it. If you do, you should be buying a cheaper phone anyways.
from TFA:
According to the administrative law judge who heard the first appeal, Uber has sole discretion over fares, and can charge drivers a cancellation fee if they choose not to take a ride, prohibit drivers from picking up passengers not using the app and suspend or deactivate drivers' accounts.
Based on that, "there was in fact an employer/employee relationship", according to the decision.
I agree with the judge on one point: if they were independent contractors, they would be free to pickup passengers not using Uber.
that you have to replace it after 12 months, maybe it wasn't a good phone to begin with. Such crap must sell for less than $100, isn't it? Oh wait...
If it was only for the FBI, they wouldn't.
Yup. But by the time oil is produced by the Earth from the CO2 within the atmosphere, it will be way too late for the climate.
A tree can grow quickly enough, so that's not that much of an issue.
And their present is far more damaging to the environment per capita than the US is now.
Citation needed.
Burning wood doesn't add CO2 to the atmosphere. Since the tree captured CO2 during growth, and you are releasing the same amount, the net sum is 0.
You forget one major point: most of Apple's customers do not care about their privacy, and do not care if the FBI can get their data.
Why should we care about a proprietary protocol allowing screen mirroring from devices from a single vendor?
I don't think students without a family PC will have a personal smartphone.
It's not a question of choosing one or the other. You have to trust both when you say that your messages are encrypted.
Yeah, that's what Apple says. The user has absolutely no way to verify these claims. Maybe there is a back door. Maybe there isn't.
Exactly. That's why I don't understand why SPF 30 could be enough. If SPF 60 is the same price and offers twice the protection, why not? Also, they sell some SPF 110 here, maybe even higher.
I don't think anyone but Apple can verify what effective type of encryption is used. It might be flawed or insecure, who knows? The end-to-end is controlled by Apple and closed-source.
Because unless the users generated their own encryption certificates, Apple can easily keep a copy of the private key and not tell you.
Whatsapp will die soon one way or another. There isn't any closed, proprietary communication protocol that survived the years (think about phone, email, telegraph, they are all open standards). The sooner the better. The whole point of these protocols is to have total reachability. If there are dozens of competing, closed messaging apps, it will suck as none of them will allow to contact everyone.
Whatsapp is so bad that it works with phone numbers. Therefore it is so bad that I don't see why anyone would want to use it.