In the model that runs everywhere else the carriers still get paid, they charge the incoming call carrier a termination fee. The telco that initiates the call pays the termination fee to the one that it eventually ends up at.
I have never, ever paid for an incoming call or text message. I couldn't even if I tried, there are no plans available in my country that offer that model. The exception would be "premium sms services" where people sign up for bullshit like daily horoscopes to be sent to them.
You could stop all spoofing completely at the telco level and for customers who need to have their public customer service numbers displayed on caller id when their call centre makes outbound calls, the telco can assign a fixed "caller id" number to each outbound line. For international calls coming in, they can be denied if they come in with a local number.
And to fix America's problem, switch from the stupid billing system you have where a mobile caller pays to receive calls. Make the caller pay, like the rest of the world. Lots of people are doing away with landlines. I don't ever get spam calls on my cellphone, it costs the spammers money. I get the odd "microsoft call centre" call on my landline, but that's ok, they're fun to mess with.
Yeah, so you can get bruised fruit and warm milk delivered by a random guy who never washes his hands. Maybe it could work if they deliver alcohol to people who run out and are too drunk to drive to get more. Uber wouldn't care about the laws that prohibit selling alcohol to intoxicated people. Laws are for the competition to follow.
They're fighting this battle because they've made a very lucrative market by refusing to sell spare parts at any price. That's further inflated because Apple charge huge amounts for simple repairs.
I still don't see the benefit outsourcing the delivery to someone else. I wouldn't order cold food perishable from a place they doesn't deliver it in something that keeps it cold.
We have also have the service that deliver a weeks worth of groceries and recipes. They're usually delivered with ice packs and insulation in the box by courier vans. Probably a good extra source of business for the courier drivers to do a round of deliveries in the suburbs after hours. But again, that only makes sense because they're delivering entire van loads of boxes to a relatively small area.
There's thousands of stories about how much of a bad deal the companies that use Uber Eats for deliveries get. They only really have a choice between losing customers and their future non-delivery business, or make no profit to keep them by offering Uber Eats. When their customer complains about cold food, they end up refunding the whole purchase, including the amount Uber keeps. They actually lose money, not just time and products. Big companies might get a better deal but small shops get shafted.
That's the problem with Uber, even $15 isn't going to be enough for someone to make money without being able to use the profit margin of the goods sold to offset it.
The supermarket knows approximately how much stock is on the shelf. They know exactly where everything is, they can have pickers dedicated to each section then combine all the bags in to the correct orders. They can absorb losses when more expensive substitutes get picked or the extra half an apple that put the bag over the 1kg that was paid for. These staff members can be a little flexible in when this all happens, so they can do other work when there are no orders, like stacking shelves. They can then load up all the orders to a single refrigerated truck to make the deliveries.
What if you expose the propylene glycol to high temperatures then inhale it? What happens if the high temperature degrades the propylene glycol to formaldehyde and then you breathe it in?
That's expensive. I pay no more than $13NZD, which is about $8.50USD. We're a relatively small country with a spread out population. Our entire country is less than half the population of Pennsylvania.
Supermarkets are big enough to run their own delivery operations. It's common in New Zealand. They have people in the different sections of the supermarket picking the items for multiple orders. You shop online and get told then that is likely in stock. If it isn't in stock when your order gets picked, they'll substitute it. If the substitute costs more, they don't charge you more, if it costs less, they'll refund you the difference. They're very generous on their weight based pricing for produce too. It's cheaper for them to give you more than fuss around trying to hit the exact value you paid for.
Your groceries then get delivered in a little refrigerated truck. No way in hell I'm having some random guy in their car deliver me frozen goods.
To top it all off, this only costs $13 for delivery. $9 if it's over $200. $118 for unlimited deliveries for 6 months - works out to only $4.5 a week. How is Uber going to compete with that price? They'd need to provide trucks or coolers too, since they can't realistically offer delivery for anything that requires refrigeration
Employees regularly re-negotiate rates. They're not even restricted by how often they can do so by their contracts. Unless you're a schmuck who turns up to work just to eat lunch.
When I was an employee, I also negotiated my salary. I did so several times a year. How else do you expect pay rises? That's not something you get to do with contracting, changing rates part way through a contract.
The negotiating thing is more an employee thing than a contractor thing.
Not all employers say that. I'm a contractor and I'm not allowed to work for a direct competitor unless I terminate my contract first. It's in the contract I signed.
What does negotiation have to do with signing a contract? If either accept all the terms or you don't, and you don't accept the contract. What's a driver going to do? Ask for more money because they're a "better" driver? Or they'll get people somewhere faster (by breaking the law?) They don't need to negotiate with their drivers unless there is a shortage of people wanting to drive.
I'm an IT contractor, working for a company that has IT systems.
They set my hourly rate I have to abide by their code of conduct They'll terminate my contract if I break it They'll terminate my contract if I don't perform They provide me with the work I need to do for them I need to do everything they ask me to, in line with my contract I need to build things to their requirements They'll tell me what I'm doing wrong if required
That applies to any freelancer. None of what you've said is relevant to the employee/contractor debate.
I'm a contractor because I do my work through a time & materials contract, not through an employment contract.
There is no way to do what you're suggesting without creating new protocols. You could still use TLS to implement #1 as is done now. You'd need a second layer that doesn't use the CA installed to make #1 work to implement #2
Which they can only do with these technologies if the computer being used is theirs. If the computer doesn't trust the CA used to create the new certificates, you'll get browser security errors. If you want to use someone else's computer, you need to obey their rules. It's not your computer.
Slashdot Mirror
In the model that runs everywhere else the carriers still get paid, they charge the incoming call carrier a termination fee.
The telco that initiates the call pays the termination fee to the one that it eventually ends up at.
I have never, ever paid for an incoming call or text message. I couldn't even if I tried, there are no plans available in my country that offer that model.
The exception would be "premium sms services" where people sign up for bullshit like daily horoscopes to be sent to them.
You could stop all spoofing completely at the telco level and for customers who need to have their public customer service numbers displayed on caller id when their call centre makes outbound calls, the telco can assign a fixed "caller id" number to each outbound line.
For international calls coming in, they can be denied if they come in with a local number.
And to fix America's problem, switch from the stupid billing system you have where a mobile caller pays to receive calls. Make the caller pay, like the rest of the world.
Lots of people are doing away with landlines. I don't ever get spam calls on my cellphone, it costs the spammers money. I get the odd "microsoft call centre" call on my landline, but that's ok, they're fun to mess with.
Depends on the airspace.
Yeah, so you can get bruised fruit and warm milk delivered by a random guy who never washes his hands.
Maybe it could work if they deliver alcohol to people who run out and are too drunk to drive to get more. Uber wouldn't care about the laws that prohibit selling alcohol to intoxicated people. Laws are for the competition to follow.
They're fighting this battle because they've made a very lucrative market by refusing to sell spare parts at any price.
That's further inflated because Apple charge huge amounts for simple repairs.
and both companies already offer delivery. Woolworths more than Foodstuffs
I still don't see the benefit outsourcing the delivery to someone else.
I wouldn't order cold food perishable from a place they doesn't deliver it in something that keeps it cold.
We have also have the service that deliver a weeks worth of groceries and recipes. They're usually delivered with ice packs and insulation in the box by courier vans. Probably a good extra source of business for the courier drivers to do a round of deliveries in the suburbs after hours. But again, that only makes sense because they're delivering entire van loads of boxes to a relatively small area.
There's thousands of stories about how much of a bad deal the companies that use Uber Eats for deliveries get. They only really have a choice between losing customers and their future non-delivery business, or make no profit to keep them by offering Uber Eats. When their customer complains about cold food, they end up refunding the whole purchase, including the amount Uber keeps. They actually lose money, not just time and products. Big companies might get a better deal but small shops get shafted.
That's the problem with Uber, even $15 isn't going to be enough for someone to make money without being able to use the profit margin of the goods sold to offset it.
The supermarket knows approximately how much stock is on the shelf. They know exactly where everything is, they can have pickers dedicated to each section then combine all the bags in to the correct orders. They can absorb losses when more expensive substitutes get picked or the extra half an apple that put the bag over the 1kg that was paid for. These staff members can be a little flexible in when this all happens, so they can do other work when there are no orders, like stacking shelves. They can then load up all the orders to a single refrigerated truck to make the deliveries.
Nice and streamlined.
What if you expose the propylene glycol to high temperatures then inhale it?
What happens if the high temperature degrades the propylene glycol to formaldehyde and then you breathe it in?
That's expensive. I pay no more than $13NZD, which is about $8.50USD. We're a relatively small country with a spread out population. Our entire country is less than half the population of Pennsylvania.
Supermarkets are big enough to run their own delivery operations.
It's common in New Zealand. They have people in the different sections of the supermarket picking the items for multiple orders.
You shop online and get told then that is likely in stock. If it isn't in stock when your order gets picked, they'll substitute it. If the substitute costs more, they don't charge you more, if it costs less, they'll refund you the difference. They're very generous on their weight based pricing for produce too. It's cheaper for them to give you more than fuss around trying to hit the exact value you paid for.
Your groceries then get delivered in a little refrigerated truck. No way in hell I'm having some random guy in their car deliver me frozen goods.
To top it all off, this only costs $13 for delivery. $9 if it's over $200. $118 for unlimited deliveries for 6 months - works out to only $4.5 a week.
How is Uber going to compete with that price? They'd need to provide trucks or coolers too, since they can't realistically offer delivery for anything that requires refrigeration
Employees regularly re-negotiate rates. They're not even restricted by how often they can do so by their contracts.
Unless you're a schmuck who turns up to work just to eat lunch.
I tell them how much I want, they say yes or no.
When I was an employee, I also negotiated my salary. I did so several times a year. How else do you expect pay rises?
That's not something you get to do with contracting, changing rates part way through a contract.
The negotiating thing is more an employee thing than a contractor thing.
The programmes are opt-in, the data collection is also opt-in, and 91% of employers provide no incentives to opt in.
After you get their permission and pay the landing fees, sure.
Along with the usual flight plans and registering them with air traffic control.
Boo fucking hoo. Switch to duckduckgo or bing or something then. Google doesn't have a monopoly on search.
Not all employers say that.
I'm a contractor and I'm not allowed to work for a direct competitor unless I terminate my contract first. It's in the contract I signed.
What does negotiation have to do with signing a contract? If either accept all the terms or you don't, and you don't accept the contract.
What's a driver going to do? Ask for more money because they're a "better" driver? Or they'll get people somewhere faster (by breaking the law?)
They don't need to negotiate with their drivers unless there is a shortage of people wanting to drive.
I'm an IT contractor, working for a company that has IT systems.
They set my hourly rate
I have to abide by their code of conduct
They'll terminate my contract if I break it
They'll terminate my contract if I don't perform
They provide me with the work I need to do for them
I need to do everything they ask me to, in line with my contract
I need to build things to their requirements
They'll tell me what I'm doing wrong if required
That applies to any freelancer. None of what you've said is relevant to the employee/contractor debate.
I'm a contractor because I do my work through a time & materials contract, not through an employment contract.
If they're employees, the limo company has insurance for that. If they're contactors, the contractor should have insurance.
There is no way to do what you're suggesting without creating new protocols.
You could still use TLS to implement #1 as is done now. You'd need a second layer that doesn't use the CA installed to make #1 work to implement #2
Without MITM, some organisations will have no option but to either
A) break the law
B) block all encrypted communication
Which they can only do with these technologies if the computer being used is theirs.
If the computer doesn't trust the CA used to create the new certificates, you'll get browser security errors.
If you want to use someone else's computer, you need to obey their rules. It's not your computer.
.... which is not "broken by design", it's an insecure configuration.