You are correct, text, video and contact isn't public forum other than the fact that they are stored in the iCloud (for most users) or a device available to the world. How is that not a public forum? It's like you leaving your contact list in a locked suit case in the middle of central park. Someone will figure out how to get inside. Sure I deviated from the main article but it seams people are surprised data can be read. If it can be written it can be read. Stop being naïve and stop storing dumb shit on your devices.
If at this point people are still surprised that this is possible then they are just naïve. Privacy in public forums (internet being the biggest forum of all) is not possible in this current age. Other than my personal information I don't care what people know or get from me. Some people have a dark past and don't want information to leak but I honestly have nothing to hide so I don't care.
Think of it this way: We are all Truman in the Truman show. The public is watching and so are the officials. Crooks will be caught and honest people LOLd if dumb moments make it online...
I'd also like to see all data older than 1 year be wiped out. No adult should have their ability to get a job hindered by history dating back when you were 12. I for one didn't do all my homework and it didn't prevent me from doing very well in college and even better when my career started.
Good to know. I didn't use MACs enough to get in the roots of how it works.
As for email, anybody can spoof but spamming is where it becomes a problem. The crooks will hack a trusted server to do their business which will allow to hit more targets since they won't be black listed too quickly.
How is this different from UAC on Windows? I get the app store and I love that concept as it makes publishers liable but for the rest you need some control and UAC is the only control available in MS products.
At the end of the day you don't want to make users unproductive by removing their flexibility but at the same time they are very unproductive when their system is down or important information leaks from threats and such.
It's not that people are dumb, it's that they don't have our technical understanding of what can be hacked. They see an email from their bank that tells them to login and they just click on the link. How would they know it's not legit unless they start looking at the URL and validating it?
IMHO the biggest problem currently is how UNSERCURE email is. It's a protocol that I believe dates from user groups (BBS). Isn't it time for us to create a unified system that can be trusted? I know lots of users here will b*tch about the idea of centralizing email but I'd like to see a better option. Currently it's too easy to just hack a mail server and make everybody believe you are someone else.
I need to know the name of the car company because that just doesn't happen today. It's not a sustainable model for any company.
And again, they probably weren't obligated to do it. The government only holds them responsible for the cost of the repair until the vehicle is 8 years of age.
We have an ex-Chrysler employee working at my office and he had a small involvement in recalls. He said the automakers are forced to honor vehicles up to 8 years of age but it may differ from one country to another. Past this, they can choose to honor the recalls but in many cases it will be at your expense.
I agree with you. I don't know one XP user that would pay for a subscription. MS is a business and for some reason the expectation is that they should continue supporting the product at no charge. Yet we don't have that expectation of anything else in life. The software world always gets shafted.
I had customers contacting me regarding a 10 year old project with a bug recently discovered. I sent them a quote to fix the issue and they asked me why I was charging to fix the software. They also told me they expected the software to work on Windows 2012 Server which I never tested... Oh well!!!
Which will never happen. Nearly every ISP that has ever used a metered approach (at least for consumer connections) has had an obscenely low baseline cost, with huge overage charges. As long as the average household has access to only about 1.5 broadband ISPs, there's no competition to keep prices sane.
I think you lost track of the original article. It speaks of removing the ISP and instead having the public own the internet. This means anything is possible including making per GB rates affordable. A quick number that comes to mind is 25 cents per GB. That will be lower than the average user's bill. I personally would double that bill based on my monthly bandwidth usage. Most plans for $50 a month only include 100GB of bandwidth and I use 200GB.
Currently many ISPs have what is called "BURSTING". The intent behind this concept is to let you buffer your stream quickly so you can start watching right away. This mostly applies to media content that can be controlled via layer 4 devices.
It isn't hard to burn through hundreds of gigabytes of data in a month just by watching entirely legal content sources like Amazon Prime, Netflix, etc. in the background while you work from home, or on weekends, or evenings, or whatever.
I'm not judging but based on what you said, burning through 100 GB on Netflix and others equals about 80 hours of TV watching. Seems high unless 4 members of a family are watching different shows.
There are no router options that can help.
You should have read my original statement carefully. I did mention that the implementation of such a system would prompt manufacturers to implement monitoring and alerts right into the router. This is very much doable. I'm sure mobile apps would also be made available via the ISP (being that the ISP would be us). I know some provider have alerts that can be sent via SMS or email. I've even seen some ISPs with the option to throttle the connection when a certain amount of bandwidth has been reached.
Pay for what you use is reasonable if you don't look at the gauging ISPs currently do. You would be paying no more than you currently do. The infrastructure cost is high and anybody thinking they should pay less than 10 cents per GB is unaware of the reality. As the infrastructure is improved and equipment paid for the cost per GB in a public system would go down and actually cost significantly less.
If you get more out of a service you should pay more. It's not for other users to pay for your needs. If you want 50 people watching TV in your house then you pay for it, not other users. In addition, 200 GB of internet usage per month is luxury, not a necessity.
You are overthinking this. At reasonable cost bandwidth metering is fine. No different than house tap you made reference to. You pay per gallon of water used. Why should it be different for bandwidth. Like a business, a public system needs to have funds for upkeep and further development. This can easily be included into a per GB rate. This won't prevent progress.
I'm not sure how much you know about the internet infrastructure but it would seem you do not understand the concept of bursting. Bursting is important in streaming. The infrastructure doesn't allow for every user to benefit from 10Mbs non stop. Instead it allows bursts. These bursts allow whatever content to be buffered so that it can eventually be viewed normally. One could say, why not upgrade the infrastructure? Well there's lots of money that needs to go into this infrastructure and I don't see anybody wanting to fork out $1000 per household to upgrade this.
Fact and the matter is that charging per GB is fine. The only complainers are those who download lots of pirated content. I'd like to know what else one downloads to achieve a 200GB download average per month. As for the people with viruses they already get screwed if they don't have an unlimited plan. If the system changed to be charged per GB, routers and other devices would evolve to provide options to their owners.
I agree and disagree. I work a management job which requires few more hours to achieve. Combine that with a 2 hours daily commute and I have no time to cook. Add kids home work, making lunches and reading bed time stories and it's 9PM before I've even had the chance to think of cooking a decent meal. Luckily I have a wife that has offset hours and finds the energy to cook.
On the weekends I cook which is proof I'm not lazy. I actually love slicing food and cooking on the BBQ, time just happens to be scarce during the work week.
Problem will be the same but will be caused by a group of people.
I for one do not want to pay for the bandwidth abusers. A solution is to pay per gig and as usual the abusers will complain. There is no happy medium because we always try to satisfy the minority. At the end of the day you should pay per use. It's only fair you pay your share of the usage. If we could all agree on this then having publicly owned infrastructure would make sense.
I love your positive view of the electric car. I think more people need to start having a positive outlook on this.
My personal concern with this is that I know Hybrid owners who saved $6000 in fuel and then got shafted for a replacement battery at $6000. At the end of the day the user didn't save money but paid a large sum for a fancy vehicle. I understand that in the near future batteries will have a much lower cost per KW but until then only those willing to take a risk will join the EV clan.
Car companies need to make the battery cost more manageable for users. The ability to swap batteries such as suggested by Tesla is a great idea. Basically, make it so the owner of the car doesn't own the battery. This will create a renewable battery industry and will allow existing structures to remain. The dream of charging at home is one that needs to be pushed aside for now.
Bahhh, we can feed on the weak. When vegetation was scarce we went on to hunt animals. We just have to shifts to cannibalism.
On a serious note, I think 15-20 years is a little early to expect famine in 2nd and 1st world countries. There are plenty of changes we can make to increase the food output. Currently there are many types of food that are manufactured that don't make good use of space. Add eating normal portions to this and we could probably cut our food intake by 40%.
I'd rather see people put eggs in storage than risk having problem babies. Studies in the last decade have shown that people that have babies after 35 are at much higher risk of having autistic kids. The only 4 autistic kids I know are from parents that opted to have kids after 35 (coincides with the studies).
Before my argument can even start making sense the following question needs to be answered: Does freezing your eggs and sperm reduced your chances of having an autistic kid if grown in an aging body?
I was just as mad when I read the article but I wonder one thing: Did the parents attempt to reach out to other parents of bullied kids to try and make the school and authorities take different action? Is there something we don't know about this case? I know many officials and I doubt they would agree to let this go buy silently.
On a side note, if your kid is being bullied or your kid is bullying another kid, here is what I recommend. Arrange a meeting with the parents. Have the kids talk to each other in front of the parents. When I was 11 my parent had me meet with the parents of the kid bullying me. The bully was also in the meeting. After that meeting, this kid never bullied another kid and I even became friends with him. Same happened to me as a parent where my kid was accused of bullying another kid. After calling for a similar meeting, we found out the kid was actually rating out my kid because he was scared of what would happen if he rated on the actual bully.
I have a different view on this matter and it's very much linked to my experience and not necessarily what is actually happening.
When I was working as a supervisor in a call centre for a well know h/w manufacturer, we were struggling to keep staff because pay was too low. Increasing pay was not an option as the product revenues were way too low and support is just an overhead nobody wants to pay for. An option would have been selling the products for more but that would mean less product sales. At the end of the day due to shortage of staff (due to better jobs available out there) and the requirement for cheap support it was almost fully outsourced.
All in all, this problem is caused by each person's greed. Here's why I say this. Lets say you go to Best Buy to purchased a gaming mouse. If you have the same mouse with 2 options: 1) $40 with support from Asia, 2) $45 with support from North America. I can assure you that most consumers will pick option 1. This is where we fall flat on our faces.
Why is management making these decisions? They are doing their jobs. Even if they know how harmful it is to our working class, they still have to do it. Companies pay their managers well to do this. Saving money is an important part of management and is one of the easiest metrics to measure. In the long run managers will be next on the list but for now they are safe.
If you look at TED talks there is one that somewhat covers this topic. It talks about how outsourcing jobs will eventually cause economies to level out. This obviously isn't good for us right now since we are at the top of the podium but we can hope that within 15 - 20 years things will have leveled off.
For now my only advice to anybody working a job is: Work hard because if you give management a reason to outsource, they will.
It's part of the salary. They pay me $xxxxxx.xx and that includes having to be disturbed during personal time. I could be making 20k less a year and be paid when I get disturbed. Honestly, I'll take the fixed salary because I can predict my annual income. The companies I've worked for also have bonuses to help compensate those who go the extra mile.
Are we talking about management / office work? If so, what do you do? I can tell you that not going the extra mile means I cannot get the job I have. End of story. While I'm at home the world continues to spin and not being available can mean a supervisor having to send people home because they couldn't overcome a hurdle I could have helped them overcome. I think that's far more hurtful for peoples income than someone committing to their job. The flexibility required for some jobs extends beyond the 40 hours / week expected in many jobs. There's responsibility and that's where extra income comes. I'm not stealing some other bozo's job, The extra income is not just a measure of your ability to do the job but is also compensation for possibly being disturbed during personal time.
Also, that system is what makes capitalism so great. If you are willing to work harder you get more out of it. If you rather spend time with your family, that is it's own reward. At the end of the day you can't crap on the other guy for choosing to do more for a company he loves working for or simply because he wants a big screen TV.
Slashdot Mirror
Fact is, they weren't obligated
You are correct, text, video and contact isn't public forum other than the fact that they are stored in the iCloud (for most users) or a device available to the world. How is that not a public forum? It's like you leaving your contact list in a locked suit case in the middle of central park. Someone will figure out how to get inside. Sure I deviated from the main article but it seams people are surprised data can be read. If it can be written it can be read. Stop being naïve and stop storing dumb shit on your devices.
If at this point people are still surprised that this is possible then they are just naïve. Privacy in public forums (internet being the biggest forum of all) is not possible in this current age. Other than my personal information I don't care what people know or get from me. Some people have a dark past and don't want information to leak but I honestly have nothing to hide so I don't care.
Think of it this way: We are all Truman in the Truman show. The public is watching and so are the officials. Crooks will be caught and honest people LOLd if dumb moments make it online...
I'd also like to see all data older than 1 year be wiped out. No adult should have their ability to get a job hindered by history dating back when you were 12. I for one didn't do all my homework and it didn't prevent me from doing very well in college and even better when my career started.
Good to know. I didn't use MACs enough to get in the roots of how it works.
As for email, anybody can spoof but spamming is where it becomes a problem. The crooks will hack a trusted server to do their business which will allow to hit more targets since they won't be black listed too quickly.
How is this different from UAC on Windows? I get the app store and I love that concept as it makes publishers liable but for the rest you need some control and UAC is the only control available in MS products.
At the end of the day you don't want to make users unproductive by removing their flexibility but at the same time they are very unproductive when their system is down or important information leaks from threats and such.
It's not that people are dumb, it's that they don't have our technical understanding of what can be hacked. They see an email from their bank that tells them to login and they just click on the link. How would they know it's not legit unless they start looking at the URL and validating it?
IMHO the biggest problem currently is how UNSERCURE email is. It's a protocol that I believe dates from user groups (BBS). Isn't it time for us to create a unified system that can be trusted? I know lots of users here will b*tch about the idea of centralizing email but I'd like to see a better option. Currently it's too easy to just hack a mail server and make everybody believe you are someone else.
I need to know the name of the car company because that just doesn't happen today. It's not a sustainable model for any company.
And again, they probably weren't obligated to do it. The government only holds them responsible for the cost of the repair until the vehicle is 8 years of age.
We have an ex-Chrysler employee working at my office and he had a small involvement in recalls. He said the automakers are forced to honor vehicles up to 8 years of age but it may differ from one country to another. Past this, they can choose to honor the recalls but in many cases it will be at your expense.
I agree with you. I don't know one XP user that would pay for a subscription. MS is a business and for some reason the expectation is that they should continue supporting the product at no charge. Yet we don't have that expectation of anything else in life. The software world always gets shafted.
I had customers contacting me regarding a 10 year old project with a bug recently discovered. I sent them a quote to fix the issue and they asked me why I was charging to fix the software. They also told me they expected the software to work on Windows 2012 Server which I never tested... Oh well!!!
Good luck getting a 15 year warranty on your car.
Which will never happen. Nearly every ISP that has ever used a metered approach (at least for consumer connections) has had an obscenely low baseline cost, with huge overage charges. As long as the average household has access to only about 1.5 broadband ISPs, there's no competition to keep prices sane.
I think you lost track of the original article. It speaks of removing the ISP and instead having the public own the internet. This means anything is possible including making per GB rates affordable. A quick number that comes to mind is 25 cents per GB. That will be lower than the average user's bill. I personally would double that bill based on my monthly bandwidth usage. Most plans for $50 a month only include 100GB of bandwidth and I use 200GB.
Currently many ISPs have what is called "BURSTING". The intent behind this concept is to let you buffer your stream quickly so you can start watching right away. This mostly applies to media content that can be controlled via layer 4 devices.
It isn't hard to burn through hundreds of gigabytes of data in a month just by watching entirely legal content sources like Amazon Prime, Netflix, etc. in the background while you work from home, or on weekends, or evenings, or whatever.
I'm not judging but based on what you said, burning through 100 GB on Netflix and others equals about 80 hours of TV watching. Seems high unless 4 members of a family are watching different shows.
There are no router options that can help.
You should have read my original statement carefully. I did mention that the implementation of such a system would prompt manufacturers to implement monitoring and alerts right into the router. This is very much doable. I'm sure mobile apps would also be made available via the ISP (being that the ISP would be us). I know some provider have alerts that can be sent via SMS or email. I've even seen some ISPs with the option to throttle the connection when a certain amount of bandwidth has been reached.
Pay for what you use is reasonable if you don't look at the gauging ISPs currently do. You would be paying no more than you currently do. The infrastructure cost is high and anybody thinking they should pay less than 10 cents per GB is unaware of the reality. As the infrastructure is improved and equipment paid for the cost per GB in a public system would go down and actually cost significantly less.
If you get more out of a service you should pay more. It's not for other users to pay for your needs. If you want 50 people watching TV in your house then you pay for it, not other users. In addition, 200 GB of internet usage per month is luxury, not a necessity.
You are overthinking this. At reasonable cost bandwidth metering is fine. No different than house tap you made reference to. You pay per gallon of water used. Why should it be different for bandwidth. Like a business, a public system needs to have funds for upkeep and further development. This can easily be included into a per GB rate. This won't prevent progress.
I'm not sure how much you know about the internet infrastructure but it would seem you do not understand the concept of bursting. Bursting is important in streaming. The infrastructure doesn't allow for every user to benefit from 10Mbs non stop. Instead it allows bursts. These bursts allow whatever content to be buffered so that it can eventually be viewed normally. One could say, why not upgrade the infrastructure? Well there's lots of money that needs to go into this infrastructure and I don't see anybody wanting to fork out $1000 per household to upgrade this.
Fact and the matter is that charging per GB is fine. The only complainers are those who download lots of pirated content. I'd like to know what else one downloads to achieve a 200GB download average per month. As for the people with viruses they already get screwed if they don't have an unlimited plan. If the system changed to be charged per GB, routers and other devices would evolve to provide options to their owners.
I agree and disagree. I work a management job which requires few more hours to achieve. Combine that with a 2 hours daily commute and I have no time to cook. Add kids home work, making lunches and reading bed time stories and it's 9PM before I've even had the chance to think of cooking a decent meal. Luckily I have a wife that has offset hours and finds the energy to cook.
On the weekends I cook which is proof I'm not lazy. I actually love slicing food and cooking on the BBQ, time just happens to be scarce during the work week.
Problem will be the same but will be caused by a group of people.
I for one do not want to pay for the bandwidth abusers. A solution is to pay per gig and as usual the abusers will complain. There is no happy medium because we always try to satisfy the minority. At the end of the day you should pay per use. It's only fair you pay your share of the usage. If we could all agree on this then having publicly owned infrastructure would make sense.
I love your positive view of the electric car. I think more people need to start having a positive outlook on this.
My personal concern with this is that I know Hybrid owners who saved $6000 in fuel and then got shafted for a replacement battery at $6000. At the end of the day the user didn't save money but paid a large sum for a fancy vehicle. I understand that in the near future batteries will have a much lower cost per KW but until then only those willing to take a risk will join the EV clan.
Car companies need to make the battery cost more manageable for users. The ability to swap batteries such as suggested by Tesla is a great idea. Basically, make it so the owner of the car doesn't own the battery. This will create a renewable battery industry and will allow existing structures to remain. The dream of charging at home is one that needs to be pushed aside for now.
Bahhh, we can feed on the weak. When vegetation was scarce we went on to hunt animals. We just have to shifts to cannibalism.
On a serious note, I think 15-20 years is a little early to expect famine in 2nd and 1st world countries. There are plenty of changes we can make to increase the food output. Currently there are many types of food that are manufactured that don't make good use of space. Add eating normal portions to this and we could probably cut our food intake by 40%.
I'd rather see people put eggs in storage than risk having problem babies. Studies in the last decade have shown that people that have babies after 35 are at much higher risk of having autistic kids. The only 4 autistic kids I know are from parents that opted to have kids after 35 (coincides with the studies).
Before my argument can even start making sense the following question needs to be answered: Does freezing your eggs and sperm reduced your chances of having an autistic kid if grown in an aging body?
I was just as mad when I read the article but I wonder one thing: Did the parents attempt to reach out to other parents of bullied kids to try and make the school and authorities take different action? Is there something we don't know about this case? I know many officials and I doubt they would agree to let this go buy silently.
On a side note, if your kid is being bullied or your kid is bullying another kid, here is what I recommend. Arrange a meeting with the parents. Have the kids talk to each other in front of the parents. When I was 11 my parent had me meet with the parents of the kid bullying me. The bully was also in the meeting. After that meeting, this kid never bullied another kid and I even became friends with him. Same happened to me as a parent where my kid was accused of bullying another kid. After calling for a similar meeting, we found out the kid was actually rating out my kid because he was scared of what would happen if he rated on the actual bully.
I have a different view on this matter and it's very much linked to my experience and not necessarily what is actually happening.
When I was working as a supervisor in a call centre for a well know h/w manufacturer, we were struggling to keep staff because pay was too low. Increasing pay was not an option as the product revenues were way too low and support is just an overhead nobody wants to pay for. An option would have been selling the products for more but that would mean less product sales. At the end of the day due to shortage of staff (due to better jobs available out there) and the requirement for cheap support it was almost fully outsourced.
All in all, this problem is caused by each person's greed. Here's why I say this. Lets say you go to Best Buy to purchased a gaming mouse. If you have the same mouse with 2 options: 1) $40 with support from Asia, 2) $45 with support from North America. I can assure you that most consumers will pick option 1. This is where we fall flat on our faces.
Why is management making these decisions? They are doing their jobs. Even if they know how harmful it is to our working class, they still have to do it. Companies pay their managers well to do this. Saving money is an important part of management and is one of the easiest metrics to measure. In the long run managers will be next on the list but for now they are safe.
If you look at TED talks there is one that somewhat covers this topic. It talks about how outsourcing jobs will eventually cause economies to level out. This obviously isn't good for us right now since we are at the top of the podium but we can hope that within 15 - 20 years things will have leveled off.
For now my only advice to anybody working a job is: Work hard because if you give management a reason to outsource, they will.
It's part of the salary. They pay me $xxxxxx.xx and that includes having to be disturbed during personal time. I could be making 20k less a year and be paid when I get disturbed. Honestly, I'll take the fixed salary because I can predict my annual income. The companies I've worked for also have bonuses to help compensate those who go the extra mile.
Hence the expression: Live and learn.
Are we talking about management / office work? If so, what do you do? I can tell you that not going the extra mile means I cannot get the job I have. End of story. While I'm at home the world continues to spin and not being available can mean a supervisor having to send people home because they couldn't overcome a hurdle I could have helped them overcome. I think that's far more hurtful for peoples income than someone committing to their job. The flexibility required for some jobs extends beyond the 40 hours / week expected in many jobs. There's responsibility and that's where extra income comes. I'm not stealing some other bozo's job, The extra income is not just a measure of your ability to do the job but is also compensation for possibly being disturbed during personal time.
It's human nature. We are reactive.
Also, that system is what makes capitalism so great. If you are willing to work harder you get more out of it. If you rather spend time with your family, that is it's own reward. At the end of the day you can't crap on the other guy for choosing to do more for a company he loves working for or simply because he wants a big screen TV.
I take it you work in support.