I came here to say this... I'm pretty sure "Xs" is in fact a dog whistle for rich people, and a nod to "excess" and gluttony. Don't be so hard on apple for calling it what it is.
I say we fight fire with fire... The Screen Actors Guild needs to get involved and write it into their contracts that they must be paid for every "work of art" that hollywood destroys when they remove someone's access to a movie... since it clearly is damaging to the actors brand when a user looses access to the artist's work.;)
I like to call this the Disney Paradox: Disneyland keeps upping their daily price for DisneyLand, and as justification they point at all the things they've added to the park... but a careful observer will notice it is physically impossibly to enjoy EVERYTHING inside the park in one day, let alone stuff like "California Adventure"... it requires multiple days to do it, requiring multiple daily ticket costs to actually enjoy all of it. Rationally, you'd think that Disney wouldn't up the ticket price because they know they'll just get more days sold... but they want to get paid twice, so they do both. Likewise, if you look at the TV/movie industry, it is physically impossible to consume all of the media being produced. There's more than 24 hours of new content produced every day. So at some point paying MORE ($200/mo in your example) doesn't actually change the benefit to the user, it just increases cost for perceived benefit. I would LOVE to see Netflix get access to every show on the planet, but if they had to pay royalties for those shows, and if their user base doesn't expand in a commensurate way, they're screwed. I'm not exactly sure how much they pay in royalties (probably a base access fee, plus a per view royalty?) but it's clear they must grow the user base and make money based on the principles of economy of scale, because they certainly can't survive by jacking up the price per subscription.
can produce what the industry euphemistically calls a "thermal event."
what they are describing is not an euphemism... it's a literal... never in the history of the world has there been a better case for the use of the word "literal." It is literally a "thermal event."
How is that statement anti-free speech? The whole point is that they're free to say things, even if they can't support their statements with ethos, pathos or logos.
If you don't think you're being paid enough, find another job.
I appreciate the sentiment, and I wish it were possible, but that doesn't work. The person you are speaking about has plenty of options for jobs, but they all pay the same low wages. I've heard it dozens of times when I was in High School: people claiming "I don't need to know this shit... I'm never going to use it." That sort of talk is a self fulfilling prophecy. Once these people enter the workplace, they're so unskilled, that nobody but Wal-Mart will hire them. The problem doesn't end there, because those same people, once they realize they're ill-equipped to survive in the workforce won't work (on their own time) to try to elevate themselves. As a nation, we need to dispel the myth that making a living isn't hard work, and we need to attack that myth early, in middle school and high school. I work my ass off, and have a blast doing it, because I learned to love working, and I picked work that I love to do. I also learned to learn, and I keep my skills sharp, which keeps me moving up. Kids need to be taught that they don't need to go out and get a job, they need to go out and create their job. Entrepreneurship should be a required class from middle school through college... that's the thing that we should be pounding into kids' heads these days. At least that's what I wish had been taught in my schools. Once that is a reality, then you can modify your advice to read "If you don't think you're being paid enough, go out and start your own business."
I can't remember where I heard this, but someone once said that defending a position by citing free speech is sort of the ultimate concession; you're saying that the most compelling thing you can say for your position is that it's not literally illegal to express.
Well, dear Anonymous Coward... you seem totally trustworthy and benevolent... so... you've got my vote. Oh wait. We don't vote on this right? How do we pick a benevolent leader if we don't vote? I'm so confused... SOMEBODY PLEASE TELL ME WHAT TO DO!!!
I just don't see this as a problem. At some point, you have to consider whether NOT walking to school in 12 feet of snow up hill both ways somehow contributed to a better education that allows us to do the amazing things we do these days. Some things simply harder, without being better.
I came here to say this... the part about "forgot my password" changes two factor back to one factor... ridiculous. I am currently rooting for true two factor hardware fobs to improve cross platform usability, but I'm not sure it has the legs.
I think twitter needs a feature called "executive override" that routes tweets from CEOs to through their lawyers first... and they can choose to release or suppress the tweet. Seriously... It's a billion dollar idea. I love Musk and his antics, it's entertaining as hell, but this is crossing the line.
I think you're ignoring a whole other angle here. What if you want to break someone out of the hospital: fake BETTER vital signs so they'll let you leave, or fake constant vital signs so you can unhook them, get them dressed and walk out while the nurse still sees a consistent signal from the monitors. What if you want not to kill them, but keep them in the hospital longer: fake only slightly worse vital signs. Lots of room to play here.
Also, if this can be done with vital signs, then how secure is the other monitoring equipment... morphine drips, etc. I think what they're pointing to is the potential.
I don't think it's a problem of incentive, I think it's a problem of awareness, education, and investment: In my experience, upper management types are unaware of these issues because they literally don't read the news, or at least not tech news. Most of these breaches don't even make the mainstream media anymore. Then most IT management types think they have good security practices, so they're not worried about it too much, and if they're surrounded by yes-men, it's even worse. Finally for those few that are in a position to act and aren't oblivious or apathetic, recognizing there is a problem and properly investing in prevention is something the organization as a whole is often not well positioned to spend a lot of money on. It's up to one IT manager to argue in budget hearings for a massive investment that only mitigates (poorly understood) risk and won't make the company any money.
In short, even people who should be in the know, are poorly equipped to asses the risk and make the right choice.
Slashdot Mirror
So I'm still unclear. Are you saying its better to pronounce it "iPhone tennis max" rather than "iPhone excess max?"
I came here to say this... I'm pretty sure "Xs" is in fact a dog whistle for rich people, and a nod to "excess" and gluttony. Don't be so hard on apple for calling it what it is.
I say we fight fire with fire... The Screen Actors Guild needs to get involved and write it into their contracts that they must be paid for every "work of art" that hollywood destroys when they remove someone's access to a movie... since it clearly is damaging to the actors brand when a user looses access to the artist's work.;)
I like to call this the Disney Paradox: Disneyland keeps upping their daily price for DisneyLand, and as justification they point at all the things they've added to the park... but a careful observer will notice it is physically impossibly to enjoy EVERYTHING inside the park in one day, let alone stuff like "California Adventure"... it requires multiple days to do it, requiring multiple daily ticket costs to actually enjoy all of it. Rationally, you'd think that Disney wouldn't up the ticket price because they know they'll just get more days sold... but they want to get paid twice, so they do both. Likewise, if you look at the TV/movie industry, it is physically impossible to consume all of the media being produced. There's more than 24 hours of new content produced every day. So at some point paying MORE ($200/mo in your example) doesn't actually change the benefit to the user, it just increases cost for perceived benefit. I would LOVE to see Netflix get access to every show on the planet, but if they had to pay royalties for those shows, and if their user base doesn't expand in a commensurate way, they're screwed. I'm not exactly sure how much they pay in royalties (probably a base access fee, plus a per view royalty?) but it's clear they must grow the user base and make money based on the principles of economy of scale, because they certainly can't survive by jacking up the price per subscription.
So you are saying I can buy movies from Linux? This changes everything!
can produce what the industry euphemistically calls a "thermal event."
what they are describing is not an euphemism... it's a literal... never in the history of the world has there been a better case for the use of the word "literal." It is literally a "thermal event."
How is that statement anti-free speech? The whole point is that they're free to say things, even if they can't support their statements with ethos, pathos or logos.
If you don't think you're being paid enough, find another job.
I appreciate the sentiment, and I wish it were possible, but that doesn't work. The person you are speaking about has plenty of options for jobs, but they all pay the same low wages. I've heard it dozens of times when I was in High School: people claiming "I don't need to know this shit... I'm never going to use it." That sort of talk is a self fulfilling prophecy. Once these people enter the workplace, they're so unskilled, that nobody but Wal-Mart will hire them. The problem doesn't end there, because those same people, once they realize they're ill-equipped to survive in the workforce won't work (on their own time) to try to elevate themselves. As a nation, we need to dispel the myth that making a living isn't hard work, and we need to attack that myth early, in middle school and high school. I work my ass off, and have a blast doing it, because I learned to love working, and I picked work that I love to do. I also learned to learn, and I keep my skills sharp, which keeps me moving up. Kids need to be taught that they don't need to go out and get a job, they need to go out and create their job. Entrepreneurship should be a required class from middle school through college... that's the thing that we should be pounding into kids' heads these days. At least that's what I wish had been taught in my schools. Once that is a reality, then you can modify your advice to read "If you don't think you're being paid enough, go out and start your own business."
Ironically, this might suppress said dependents desire to leave the nest...
I especially like the hover text on that XKCD:
I can't remember where I heard this, but someone once said that defending a position by citing free speech is sort of the ultimate concession; you're saying that the most compelling thing you can say for your position is that it's not literally illegal to express.
Does that same switch also unlock the key? I think you missed the point.
Not trolling you... seriously, but do you have evidence of this? I'd love to see it.
Well, dear Anonymous Coward... you seem totally trustworthy and benevolent... so... you've got my vote. Oh wait. We don't vote on this right? How do we pick a benevolent leader if we don't vote? I'm so confused... SOMEBODY PLEASE TELL ME WHAT TO DO!!!
I just don't see this as a problem. At some point, you have to consider whether NOT walking to school in 12 feet of snow up hill both ways somehow contributed to a better education that allows us to do the amazing things we do these days. Some things simply harder, without being better.
... that AI already has?
I came here to say this... the part about "forgot my password" changes two factor back to one factor... ridiculous. I am currently rooting for true two factor hardware fobs to improve cross platform usability, but I'm not sure it has the legs.
I think twitter needs a feature called "executive override" that routes tweets from CEOs to through their lawyers first... and they can choose to release or suppress the tweet. Seriously... It's a billion dollar idea. I love Musk and his antics, it's entertaining as hell, but this is crossing the line.
That's so weird... I have an apple sticker covering the Dell logo on my Inspiron. here's to camouflage.
...while I slap some stickers on this honeypot.
I think you're ignoring a whole other angle here. What if you want to break someone out of the hospital: fake BETTER vital signs so they'll let you leave, or fake constant vital signs so you can unhook them, get them dressed and walk out while the nurse still sees a consistent signal from the monitors. What if you want not to kill them, but keep them in the hospital longer: fake only slightly worse vital signs. Lots of room to play here.
Also, if this can be done with vital signs, then how secure is the other monitoring equipment... morphine drips, etc. I think what they're pointing to is the potential.
You missed the part where the audience selected the "keystone cops" avatars for the computer to use during round 3.
I don't think it's a problem of incentive, I think it's a problem of awareness, education, and investment: In my experience, upper management types are unaware of these issues because they literally don't read the news, or at least not tech news. Most of these breaches don't even make the mainstream media anymore. Then most IT management types think they have good security practices, so they're not worried about it too much, and if they're surrounded by yes-men, it's even worse. Finally for those few that are in a position to act and aren't oblivious or apathetic, recognizing there is a problem and properly investing in prevention is something the organization as a whole is often not well positioned to spend a lot of money on. It's up to one IT manager to argue in budget hearings for a massive investment that only mitigates (poorly understood) risk and won't make the company any money.
In short, even people who should be in the know, are poorly equipped to asses the risk and make the right choice.
I wish there were mod points for "Troll, but in a good way +1"
That doesn't mean she wasn't hacked, it means that the state department detected their hack, while Hillary didn't.
It's called the "pear of anguish"... don't look it up.