I'm guessing there isn't many people out there that modified their registry to prevent automatic updates? I've done it, and only install the updates that I want... It's extremely nice not to be forced to run updates
We need certain permissions from you to provide our services: Specifically, when you share, post, or upload content that is covered by intellectual property rights (like photos or videos) on or in connection with our Products, you grant us a non-exclusive, transferable, sub-licensable, royalty-free, and worldwide license to host, use, distribute, modify, run, copy, publicly perform or display, translate, and create derivative works of your content (consistent with your privacy and application settings). This means, for example, that if you share a photo on Facebook, you give us permission to store, copy, and share it with others (again, consistent with your settings) such as service providers that support our service or other Facebook Products you use.
You can end this license any time by deleting your content or account. You should know that, for technical reasons, content you delete may persist for a limited period of time in backup copies (though it will not be visible to other users). In addition, content you delete may continue to appear if you have shared it with others and they have not deleted it."
There is a big difference between handing over a material possession for repair work and clicking on a link that states you read the ToS and agree to give away the rights to digital work you've uploaded somewhere. You are correct, however, these websites could put a disclaimer in stating all the rights still belong to you, but the sites that I've listed above don't do that. Try reading the ToS and EUA's instead of just assuming.
You may want to try reading the terms again buddy... Except now it's a bit harder since they have each set of terms linking to other terms and back again. But like I said in my original post, the odds of them coming after joe nobody for a random picture is slim. But there's still the chance.
Exactly, and the main thing with f*ckbook (unless they've changed their terms recently), they can do what they want with any content you've uploaded UNLESS you delete your account. That's where they get fubar'd trying to use your content... (wait for it)... BUT, if any of your friends have shared it on their page or copied it to their page, now deleting your account won't work... you'd have to get whoever copied it to delete their accounts too! They've basically left the wording so vague, they can do whatever they want, whenever they want, with whatever content you've uploaded. It's way too messed up.
The most common clause that I've come across is one for photographs. F*ckbook is one that "owns" any photos uploaded to the site. It's actually written quite clearly in the UA. Once I found that out, I started looking more closely at places that asked me to upload photos.
I was trying to get some large prints made up of some photos that I had taken. Most places will only do up to a certain size in shop; for larger prints, I was asked to upload a copy of the file to their corporate website, the image would be made to the size requested and then sent to the local store for pickup. After reading through the agreement prior to uploading the picture, I found these places all claim to own the picture once uploaded. These were places like Walmart, Costco, Black's Photography... they all had the same clause.
I know what some of you are thinking... who the fuck cares... for me it was the principle of it. This is my picture, and if by some slim chance I take an absolutely perfect picture that someone wants to purchase, I would risk getting sued because anyplace that I've uploaded it to could claim copyright on it.
I still skim over UA's or EUA's every now and again. However, I more times than not, I read them... we can always use reading material on the shitter...
Not that I'm trying to defend anything here, but the statements about requiring a fully alert driver behind the wheel... isn't that the law? I know he's made some very large claims about the self driving technology, but until the laws change to allow people to not pay attention to the road, they need to put that statement in everywhere, don't they?
I mean, I think the self driving feature as it is now, can work... but you need a place where there are no human drivers. Until that "random" factor of human error is removed from the equation, I think it will be a very, very long time before we see fully (legally allowed on the road) self driving cars.
I know lot's of people who still have basic land line service. And I'm sure most businesses have land lines... I don't know of any business that relies fully on cell towers.
I know I will always have a land line in my home for one main reason. Have you ever been in a situation where everyone in a city tries to use their cell phones at the same time (i.e. natural disaster)? I have, and cell towers are easily overloaded in that situation. My land line... worked like a charm to phone out of the city.
I'm not saying that they don't have problems. Just that there is almost no chance of them ever working while there is still a human element to account for. By having an entire area designated as "self driving cars only", you remove the human element. Right now, they're trying to program a car to account for erratic human behavior.
Yes, the self driving cars have a long way to go before all the bugs are worked out, but imagine how much easier it would be to not have to worry about human driven vehicles.
The first area would obviously be the test, but if it works, then they can expand the boarders, or simply continue building the area outwards.
There is only one possible way I can see self driving cars working, if we don't want to wait another decade for them. You need to eliminate all the non-self driving cars from the equation. And like most of you out there, that simply will not happen. I don't want to give up my right to drive myself. I'm guessing it's the same for many people out there. So how do we do this? Below is the only way I can see it happening.
First, you would need to establish a new "neighborhood", whether for commercial or residential, it would work either way. Designate the entire neighborhood as self driving cars only. Make it illegal to have a non-self driving car inside the designated area. Have a parking garage on the border for people to leave their non-self driving cars. If their can has a self driving feature, they can have it activated when they enter the designated "neighborhood", and deactivated when they leave the area.
You need to remove the human element from the equation in order for this to work properly. And the only way I can see that happening is by having an area where no human element was allowed to take hold in the first place. No amount of programming can account for the stupidity of people.
Like the old saying, make something foolproof, and the world will make a better fool.
After a quick search on the bridge history, you'll see the original engineer (Riccardo Morandi) wrote about the corrosion back in 1979 and warned that it would need maintenance soon due to the sea air and pollution from a nearby steel mill.
This was the city's own fault for not following up with it for over 40 years.
You would be surprised how many companies do this with content you upload to them. If you want to get really large images made up, and the shops (let's say Black's Photography) can't do it in house. They ask you to upload it to their website and it will be done and shipped to the closest location. Upon reading the fine print in website user agreement, they then own that image and can use it however they like.
I don't remember the last time I uploaded an image to any website (social or otherwise) because they all use the same language in the end user agreements now.
I also have a Mavic, and I don't know what you're doing, but I can choose to skip any update that comes out. I've never been forced to install any update, either on my phone or on the drone itself. It has always been my choice to install the updates.
the difference is that a person in the car with you is still aware of the surroundings and is a potential extra set of eyes that can see things happening around you (ie. if you're about to drive through a stop sign, or if someone runs out into the road infront of you). Talking on cell phone, completely different.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm guessing there isn't many people out there that modified their registry to prevent automatic updates? I've done it, and only install the updates that I want... It's extremely nice not to be forced to run updates
From their ToS:
"3. The permissions you give us
We need certain permissions from you to provide our services: Specifically, when you share, post, or upload content that is covered by intellectual property rights (like photos or videos) on or in connection with our Products, you grant us a non-exclusive, transferable, sub-licensable, royalty-free, and worldwide license to host, use, distribute, modify, run, copy, publicly perform or display, translate, and create derivative works of your content (consistent with your privacy and application settings). This means, for example, that if you share a photo on Facebook, you give us permission to store, copy, and share it with others (again, consistent with your settings) such as service providers that support our service or other Facebook Products you use.
You can end this license any time by deleting your content or account. You should know that, for technical reasons, content you delete may persist for a limited period of time in backup copies (though it will not be visible to other users). In addition, content you delete may continue to appear if you have shared it with others and they have not deleted it."
There is a big difference between handing over a material possession for repair work and clicking on a link that states you read the ToS and agree to give away the rights to digital work you've uploaded somewhere. You are correct, however, these websites could put a disclaimer in stating all the rights still belong to you, but the sites that I've listed above don't do that. Try reading the ToS and EUA's instead of just assuming.
You may want to try reading the terms again buddy... Except now it's a bit harder since they have each set of terms linking to other terms and back again. But like I said in my original post, the odds of them coming after joe nobody for a random picture is slim. But there's still the chance.
Exactly, and the main thing with f*ckbook (unless they've changed their terms recently), they can do what they want with any content you've uploaded UNLESS you delete your account. That's where they get fubar'd trying to use your content... (wait for it)... BUT, if any of your friends have shared it on their page or copied it to their page, now deleting your account won't work... you'd have to get whoever copied it to delete their accounts too! They've basically left the wording so vague, they can do whatever they want, whenever they want, with whatever content you've uploaded. It's way too messed up.
The most common clause that I've come across is one for photographs. F*ckbook is one that "owns" any photos uploaded to the site. It's actually written quite clearly in the UA. Once I found that out, I started looking more closely at places that asked me to upload photos.
I was trying to get some large prints made up of some photos that I had taken. Most places will only do up to a certain size in shop; for larger prints, I was asked to upload a copy of the file to their corporate website, the image would be made to the size requested and then sent to the local store for pickup. After reading through the agreement prior to uploading the picture, I found these places all claim to own the picture once uploaded. These were places like Walmart, Costco, Black's Photography... they all had the same clause.
I know what some of you are thinking... who the fuck cares... for me it was the principle of it. This is my picture, and if by some slim chance I take an absolutely perfect picture that someone wants to purchase, I would risk getting sued because anyplace that I've uploaded it to could claim copyright on it.
I still skim over UA's or EUA's every now and again. However, I more times than not, I read them... we can always use reading material on the shitter...
Not that I'm trying to defend anything here, but the statements about requiring a fully alert driver behind the wheel... isn't that the law? I know he's made some very large claims about the self driving technology, but until the laws change to allow people to not pay attention to the road, they need to put that statement in everywhere, don't they?
I mean, I think the self driving feature as it is now, can work... but you need a place where there are no human drivers. Until that "random" factor of human error is removed from the equation, I think it will be a very, very long time before we see fully (legally allowed on the road) self driving cars.
I know lot's of people who still have basic land line service. And I'm sure most businesses have land lines... I don't know of any business that relies fully on cell towers.
I know I will always have a land line in my home for one main reason. Have you ever been in a situation where everyone in a city tries to use their cell phones at the same time (i.e. natural disaster)? I have, and cell towers are easily overloaded in that situation. My land line... worked like a charm to phone out of the city.
I'm not saying that they don't have problems. Just that there is almost no chance of them ever working while there is still a human element to account for. By having an entire area designated as "self driving cars only", you remove the human element. Right now, they're trying to program a car to account for erratic human behavior.
Yes, the self driving cars have a long way to go before all the bugs are worked out, but imagine how much easier it would be to not have to worry about human driven vehicles.
The first area would obviously be the test, but if it works, then they can expand the boarders, or simply continue building the area outwards.
There is only one possible way I can see self driving cars working, if we don't want to wait another decade for them. You need to eliminate all the non-self driving cars from the equation. And like most of you out there, that simply will not happen. I don't want to give up my right to drive myself. I'm guessing it's the same for many people out there. So how do we do this? Below is the only way I can see it happening.
First, you would need to establish a new "neighborhood", whether for commercial or residential, it would work either way. Designate the entire neighborhood as self driving cars only. Make it illegal to have a non-self driving car inside the designated area. Have a parking garage on the border for people to leave their non-self driving cars. If their can has a self driving feature, they can have it activated when they enter the designated "neighborhood", and deactivated when they leave the area.
You need to remove the human element from the equation in order for this to work properly. And the only way I can see that happening is by having an area where no human element was allowed to take hold in the first place. No amount of programming can account for the stupidity of people.
Like the old saying, make something foolproof, and the world will make a better fool.
After a quick search on the bridge history, you'll see the original engineer (Riccardo Morandi) wrote about the corrosion back in 1979 and warned that it would need maintenance soon due to the sea air and pollution from a nearby steel mill.
This was the city's own fault for not following up with it for over 40 years.
You would be surprised how many companies do this with content you upload to them. If you want to get really large images made up, and the shops (let's say Black's Photography) can't do it in house. They ask you to upload it to their website and it will be done and shipped to the closest location. Upon reading the fine print in website user agreement, they then own that image and can use it however they like.
I don't remember the last time I uploaded an image to any website (social or otherwise) because they all use the same language in the end user agreements now.
I also have a Mavic, and I don't know what you're doing, but I can choose to skip any update that comes out. I've never been forced to install any update, either on my phone or on the drone itself. It has always been my choice to install the updates.
I don't even see the code anymore. All I see is blond, brunette, redhead....
I think I saw the movie about that...
What happened to the EV1 and with the push for new hybrid's and all electric vechiles, why haven't we seen the EV1 re-emerge yet?
I'm sure this will work just as well, if not better, than the national do not call list for telemarketers.
Orca: What do you mean "So long, and thanks for all the fish"? What aren't you telling me?
Whenever I see articles like the OP and comments like these, it always reminds me of this...
http://www.dailymotion.com/vid...
the difference is that a person in the car with you is still aware of the surroundings and is a potential extra set of eyes that can see things happening around you (ie. if you're about to drive through a stop sign, or if someone runs out into the road infront of you). Talking on cell phone, completely different.
1, 2, 3, 4, 5? That's amazing! I've got the same combination on my luggage! [Sandurz and Darth Helmet look at each other in horror]
You've never worked inside a 40 year old nuclear plant before, have you?
I wonder how hard it would be to get them to teach about the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster! Hell, I would enroll in that class!
no worries, she was proably using apple maps and followed the directions a little too closely
Shall we play a game?