One should be worried about everything from the app store. It is awash in "free" games, GPS apps, etc that do nothing but mascarade as ad delivery conduits that also spy on the user.
This isn't new or limited to free VPN apps.
Just the other day we had a story about "free" GPS apps that were nothing but Google Map overlays that show ads. A few years ago there was a story about a bunch of long abandoned apps that had suddenly come alive again. It turned out that a Russian company bought the apps and their domains and had begun "updating" the app with new invasive code.
At times I feel like we're back in the late 80's / early 90's again downloading unknown cool sounding programs in the middle of the night off some guy's BBS. The difference is today the apps are surrounded in aura of legitimacy because they come from a "store".
That's not a bad idea, but how do you handle the issue of which internet connection to use? Given that the whole point is hide your communication, to be effective the VPN endpoint would need to be somewhere that isn't tied to you. So no running it through your home line or a business.
"a boot to the head: when you know that Google just doesn't care any more" about users "who have become 'inconvenient' to their new business models."
-----
Protip: Google doesn't care about its users. Ever. Treat every Google product you use as if it may disappear into the ether tomorrow. It's too bad because they do some cool stuff. But like the drunken ADD squirrel upon boredom they move on to the next thing and neglect the product.
This has been Google's patter for over a decade now. I'm genuinely surprised someone is still surprised by this.
The point of the comment was changes in consensus over time. But since you wish to be a Slashdot neckbeard and pontificate over commonly understood colloquial terms rather than discuss the issue, here is an MD saying the same shit I did: https://health.usnews.com/heal...
The newest diet fad is "intermittent fasting". 20 years ago it was "skipping breakfast" and was bad for you.
"1,500 years ago, everybody knew that the Earth was the center of the universe. 500 years ago, everybody knew that the Earth was flat. And 15 minutes ago, you knew that humans were alone on this planet. Imagine what you'll know tomorrow."
I tried to cut the cord and didn't like it. For one, I wasn't saving much once the Hulu, Amazon, Netflix, HBO, and ESPN subscriptions were priced in. For two between the previous services and an OTA it became a damn scavenger hunt to find which services had the stuff we wanted to watch.......just to then find out "Sorry, that's on Youtube" etc.
This is why Roku came with a search feature that would search the streaming services for you.
That's all fine and good but such a search assumes:
1) That you already know what you're looking for, and
2) That said content is available on a service that you have.
I guess there are people out there always up to date on the newest stuff and always know exactly what they want to watch. Bully for them.
What I got from reading your post is that, you sir, watch too much goddamned TV. Hulu, Amazon, Netflix, HBO, and ESPN subs? A Tivo, a cable card, and 2 Tivo minis? Jesus Effing Christ.
Some day you may know the touch of a woman. If that happens and kids result, then this thread will have more relevance to you.
Financially that's all true and that's why they did it. While Netflix may see themselves as content producers, the problem is many of their subscribers see them instead as content delivery thus their originals may or may not be content that people actually want to watch.
Or to put it another way, Netflix started as an alternative to video rental. Then they reinvented themselves and have had some success to the point that others now are trying to copy. So in a world where everyone wants to be a creator and no one wants to merely deliver someone else's content, where do you go to watch movies etc?
I tried to cut the cord and didn't like it. For one, I wasn't saving much once the Hulu, Amazon, Netflix, HBO, and ESPN subscriptions were priced in. For two between the previous services and an OTA it became a damn scavenger hunt to find which services had the stuff we wanted to watch.......just to then find out "Sorry, that's on Youtube" etc.
After a couple months we tried a compromise by getting Directtv Now. The service its self isn't ready for prime time. The interface is buggy and on an Apple TV navigating the guide was an exercise in infinite scrolling. And in our market they didn't have local channels available so we still had to use an antenna.
In the end we went back to a low tier cable subscription with a few streaming services to supplement. I paid up front for a Tivo with a lifetime subscription, rent a cable card for $5 a month, and have two tivo minis for other rooms in the house.
At the end of the day cable "just works". I don't want to come home after a long day and putz around hopping from one service to another looking for something to watch. Yes, it's somewhat brainless.
The thing about streaming services is that they are going to fracture more and more as time goes on. Various content holders are figuring out that they might as well set up their own distribution channels and pay themselves to show their IP. They tried this vertical integration back in the early 20th century by trying to run theaters too. Those efforts were slapped down as anti-trust violations. Today though, it would seem anything goes.
We are in the process of trading all you can eat cable service for a series of smaller walled gardens.
Pick your poison. But if you're holding out for a cell phone that is not spying on you.......well you're just ice skating up hill there. Increasingly the only solution is to leave your phone at home, and insist everyone with you do the same.
Sucks but true: This doesn't occur on I-phones. The carriers are taking advantage of the open nature of Android to push apps on to the phone. And because Android is open to the world, they know exactly how to do it. They can't do that with I-phones because it's not open and Apple won't tell them / allow them to do it (at least for now. That might change if revenue keeps dropping).
Phones are good enough and not enough people care about a new camera to justify buying a new one. Smartphones, from any manufacturer, are not status symbols anymore.
Tell that to my wife. She salivates every time the Pixel 3 commercials come on. To hear her tell it a wider selfie camera is the only thing standing between us and a life of complete fulfillment.
Now with smart phones. This leaves manufacturers with two options: 1) Open new markets, or 2) Actually innovate. Unless a whole bunch of new tribes are discovered, the former ain't happening. Which means we all hold our breath and wait for #2.
Until that happens we should all prepare ourselves for wave after wave of dull non-innovative over-priced dreck.
1/3 of all Boomers intend to leave no inheritance. Think about that for a min. Something is truly rotten with them as a generation**
**yes, yes individuals notwithstanding
So? If one has sacrificed and accumulated savings for their later years, why is it so bad if one wants to spend it?
"No luxuries or fun for you mom and dad. You have to suffer in retirement so there's more money for me!"
To quote Glengarry Glen Ross, "How fucked *up* you are!"
/Gen Xer. //Not counting on my parents to fund my retirement plan.
After 20 years in I.T. I got tired of the technology treadmill. In my 20's it was fun staying up half the night figuring new stuff out. In my early 30's it became a huge drag. So I started sowing the seeds of change. I got an MBA and began working more on the business side of I.T. Then I went to law school, passed the bar, and became an attorney.
Now I have my own firm doing business law and general counsel work for corporations. I'm my own boss, am making bank, and work when I want to. The soft skills acquired in I.T. (handling users, general computer use, and integrating I.T. with the needs of the business) make for a combination that not many attorneys have. The ability to speak the "language of business" is a huge plus.
I get where OP is coming from. IMHO I.T. is a young man's game and doesn't necessarily accommodate aging. The environment he describes is very real. And I'd wager the pace is not going to change.
There are still millions of people who choose to buy an American car for the sole purpose of supporting their own country. If you can't get past that you have no understanding of the complexities of what it means to be human. To laugh it off as a poor choice based on your own values is shortsighted and stupid.
When a person does so for those reasons it is a sure fire sign that person is either 1)living in a grossly misinformed past, or 2)is just an idiot.
The Big 3 today are multinationals and are not "American" companies anymore. They source parts from wherever they need, build cars wherever it's cheapest, and export whenever marketing tells them they have brand recognition.
They are true international companies that feign U.S. patriotism.
Work in the industry long enough and what you see is that the automotive business does not innovate and downright sucks when it comes to developing and implementing their own tech.
Examples: Dealerships are locked into hopelessly obsolete systems through UCS (now Reynolds), CDK, ADP automotive, etc. They still actively push solutions that use 10 year old cisco routers, dot matrix printers, and etc. I even saw SCO Unix still being used around 2012. When one vendor dipped their toe in the water and made a (shitty) web based system, everyone panicked.
In car entertainment systems: They suck too. At first the companies tried to develop their own (Ford Link, Lincoln in car entertainment, I forget what GM called their abortion entry). After they figured out they couldn't do systems worth a damn, they tried to partner with others. And somehow managed to screw that up (Microsoft's Sync implementations come to mind ).
On the other hand you have the tech companies. They may make a better software product, but they don't have 80 years of car building and engineering experience. Tesla makes a hell of a car, but they can't scale and right now they are crafting parts in fucking *tents* attached to their factories. They are going to have quality control issues out the wazoo.
Add all of this up and the advantage still goes to the auto makers because:
1) They have the manufacturing capacity and partner relationships. The big 3 can integrate self driving software. Self driving people have to buy / design the car and retrofit it.; and
2) People are already use to driving their own cars. It is the tech companies that are trying to change the paradigm. They will have the pressure to make a perfect product. If they have a flaw we'll all be taking about how they fucked up the self driving aspect. On the other hand all the auto makers have to do is make car that drives with a drive assist feature that is passable. If they have a problem, we'll roll our eyes and say the car is ok but the self driving needs improvement.
In order for self driving cars to really become successful and enter the mainstream, the tech guys are going to have to go automotive.
If Trump had an intention of paying it otherwise, then why didn't he do it earlier? The event happened in 2006. The money wasn't paid until 2016. It's almost as if *something* was going on that suddenly made the revelation much more damaging.........
I mean it's either that, or you're just an obtuse shill. I'm choosing the benefit of the doubt.
Your blushing hooker wife is embarrassed because your penis is so small. Like throwing a hotdog down a filthy hallway covered in graffiti with even more passed out hookers and syringes lining the floors.
Your information is outdated. All anti-trust claims were settled in 2014. DeBeers is free to do business in the U.S. and is contemplating direct diamond sales.
Quote: African governments are notorious for interfering with citizens' internet access, particularly around election time or during periods of unrest.
Yea. You may want to take a look closer to home, subs. Western governments have been in on this for some time.
Slashdot Mirror
One should be worried about everything from the app store. It is awash in "free" games, GPS apps, etc that do nothing but mascarade as ad delivery conduits that also spy on the user.
This isn't new or limited to free VPN apps.
Just the other day we had a story about "free" GPS apps that were nothing but Google Map overlays that show ads. A few years ago there was a story about a bunch of long abandoned apps that had suddenly come alive again. It turned out that a Russian company bought the apps and their domains and had begun "updating" the app with new invasive code.
At times I feel like we're back in the late 80's / early 90's again downloading unknown cool sounding programs in the middle of the night off some guy's BBS. The difference is today the apps are surrounded in aura of legitimacy because they come from a "store".
That's not a bad idea, but how do you handle the issue of which internet connection to use? Given that the whole point is hide your communication, to be effective the VPN endpoint would need to be somewhere that isn't tied to you. So no running it through your home line or a business.
"a boot to the head: when you know that Google just doesn't care any more" about users "who have become 'inconvenient' to their new business models." ----- Protip: Google doesn't care about its users. Ever. Treat every Google product you use as if it may disappear into the ether tomorrow. It's too bad because they do some cool stuff. But like the drunken ADD squirrel upon boredom they move on to the next thing and neglect the product.
This has been Google's patter for over a decade now. I'm genuinely surprised someone is still surprised by this.
Down from 40's to 34's and even 32's after about 9 months of sticking to real food 32 pounds = 14.5kg. Weight of a 8 years old kid.
Don't believe me, prove me wrong. Unless one with a gene that growth no taller than 3 feets, 40 pounds basically spell mulnutritions.
I could be wrong, but I gather the comment was referring to pant sizes.
The point of the comment was changes in consensus over time. But since you wish to be a Slashdot neckbeard and pontificate over commonly understood colloquial terms rather than discuss the issue, here is an MD saying the same shit I did:
https://health.usnews.com/heal...
The newest diet fad is "intermittent fasting". 20 years ago it was "skipping breakfast" and was bad for you.
"1,500 years ago, everybody knew that the Earth was the center of the universe. 500 years ago, everybody knew that the Earth was flat. And 15 minutes ago, you knew that humans were alone on this planet. Imagine what you'll know tomorrow."
I tried to cut the cord and didn't like it. For one, I wasn't saving much once the Hulu, Amazon, Netflix, HBO, and ESPN subscriptions were priced in. For two between the previous services and an OTA it became a damn scavenger hunt to find which services had the stuff we wanted to watch.......just to then find out "Sorry, that's on Youtube" etc.
This is why Roku came with a search feature that would search the streaming services for you.
That's all fine and good but such a search assumes:
1) That you already know what you're looking for, and
2) That said content is available on a service that you have.
I guess there are people out there always up to date on the newest stuff and always know exactly what they want to watch. Bully for them.
What I got from reading your post is that, you sir, watch too much goddamned TV. Hulu, Amazon, Netflix, HBO, and ESPN subs? A Tivo, a cable card, and 2 Tivo minis? Jesus Effing Christ.
Some day you may know the touch of a woman. If that happens and kids result, then this thread will have more relevance to you.
Financially that's all true and that's why they did it. While Netflix may see themselves as content producers, the problem is many of their subscribers see them instead as content delivery thus their originals may or may not be content that people actually want to watch.
Or to put it another way, Netflix started as an alternative to video rental. Then they reinvented themselves and have had some success to the point that others now are trying to copy. So in a world where everyone wants to be a creator and no one wants to merely deliver someone else's content, where do you go to watch movies etc?
I tried to cut the cord and didn't like it. For one, I wasn't saving much once the Hulu, Amazon, Netflix, HBO, and ESPN subscriptions were priced in. For two between the previous services and an OTA it became a damn scavenger hunt to find which services had the stuff we wanted to watch.......just to then find out "Sorry, that's on Youtube" etc.
After a couple months we tried a compromise by getting Directtv Now. The service its self isn't ready for prime time. The interface is buggy and on an Apple TV navigating the guide was an exercise in infinite scrolling. And in our market they didn't have local channels available so we still had to use an antenna.
In the end we went back to a low tier cable subscription with a few streaming services to supplement. I paid up front for a Tivo with a lifetime subscription, rent a cable card for $5 a month, and have two tivo minis for other rooms in the house.
At the end of the day cable "just works". I don't want to come home after a long day and putz around hopping from one service to another looking for something to watch. Yes, it's somewhat brainless.
The thing about streaming services is that they are going to fracture more and more as time goes on. Various content holders are figuring out that they might as well set up their own distribution channels and pay themselves to show their IP. They tried this vertical integration back in the early 20th century by trying to run theaters too. Those efforts were slapped down as anti-trust violations. Today though, it would seem anything goes.
We are in the process of trading all you can eat cable service for a series of smaller walled gardens.
Pick your poison. But if you're holding out for a cell phone that is not spying on you.......well you're just ice skating up hill there. Increasingly the only solution is to leave your phone at home, and insist everyone with you do the same.
Sucks but true: This doesn't occur on I-phones. The carriers are taking advantage of the open nature of Android to push apps on to the phone. And because Android is open to the world, they know exactly how to do it. They can't do that with I-phones because it's not open and Apple won't tell them / allow them to do it (at least for now. That might change if revenue keeps dropping).
Or you can get an unlocked non-vendor supplied I-phone which doesn't do that shit (as of right now anyway).
Yup. Same for the Blackberry Keyone I had in 2017. Very annoying.
Phones are good enough and not enough people care about a new camera to justify buying a new one. Smartphones, from any manufacturer, are not status symbols anymore.
Tell that to my wife. She salivates every time the Pixel 3 commercials come on. To hear her tell it a wider selfie camera is the only thing standing between us and a life of complete fulfillment.
Now with smart phones. This leaves manufacturers with two options: 1) Open new markets, or 2) Actually innovate. Unless a whole bunch of new tribes are discovered, the former ain't happening. Which means we all hold our breath and wait for #2.
Until that happens we should all prepare ourselves for wave after wave of dull non-innovative over-priced dreck.
So? If one has sacrificed and accumulated savings for their later years, why is it so bad if one wants to spend it?
/Gen Xer.
//Not counting on my parents to fund my retirement plan.
"No luxuries or fun for you mom and dad. You have to suffer in retirement so there's more money for me!"
To quote Glengarry Glen Ross, "How fucked *up* you are!"
After 20 years in I.T. I got tired of the technology treadmill. In my 20's it was fun staying up half the night figuring new stuff out. In my early 30's it became a huge drag. So I started sowing the seeds of change. I got an MBA and began working more on the business side of I.T. Then I went to law school, passed the bar, and became an attorney.
Now I have my own firm doing business law and general counsel work for corporations. I'm my own boss, am making bank, and work when I want to. The soft skills acquired in I.T. (handling users, general computer use, and integrating I.T. with the needs of the business) make for a combination that not many attorneys have. The ability to speak the "language of business" is a huge plus.
I get where OP is coming from. IMHO I.T. is a young man's game and doesn't necessarily accommodate aging. The environment he describes is very real. And I'd wager the pace is not going to change.
There are still millions of people who choose to buy an American car for the sole purpose of supporting their own country. If you can't get past that you have no understanding of the complexities of what it means to be human. To laugh it off as a poor choice based on your own values is shortsighted and stupid.
When a person does so for those reasons it is a sure fire sign that person is either 1)living in a grossly misinformed past, or 2)is just an idiot.
The Big 3 today are multinationals and are not "American" companies anymore. They source parts from wherever they need, build cars wherever it's cheapest, and export whenever marketing tells them they have brand recognition.
They are true international companies that feign U.S. patriotism.
Work in the industry long enough and what you see is that the automotive business does not innovate and downright sucks when it comes to developing and implementing their own tech.
Examples: Dealerships are locked into hopelessly obsolete systems through UCS (now Reynolds), CDK, ADP automotive, etc. They still actively push solutions that use 10 year old cisco routers, dot matrix printers, and etc. I even saw SCO Unix still being used around 2012. When one vendor dipped their toe in the water and made a (shitty) web based system, everyone panicked.
In car entertainment systems: They suck too. At first the companies tried to develop their own (Ford Link, Lincoln in car entertainment, I forget what GM called their abortion entry). After they figured out they couldn't do systems worth a damn, they tried to partner with others. And somehow managed to screw that up (Microsoft's Sync implementations come to mind ).
On the other hand you have the tech companies. They may make a better software product, but they don't have 80 years of car building and engineering experience. Tesla makes a hell of a car, but they can't scale and right now they are crafting parts in fucking *tents* attached to their factories. They are going to have quality control issues out the wazoo.
Add all of this up and the advantage still goes to the auto makers because:
1) They have the manufacturing capacity and partner relationships. The big 3 can integrate self driving software. Self driving people have to buy / design the car and retrofit it.; and
2) People are already use to driving their own cars. It is the tech companies that are trying to change the paradigm. They will have the pressure to make a perfect product. If they have a flaw we'll all be taking about how they fucked up the self driving aspect. On the other hand all the auto makers have to do is make car that drives with a drive assist feature that is passable. If they have a problem, we'll roll our eyes and say the car is ok but the self driving needs improvement.
In order for self driving cars to really become successful and enter the mainstream, the tech guys are going to have to go automotive.
If Trump had an intention of paying it otherwise, then why didn't he do it earlier? The event happened in 2006. The money wasn't paid until 2016. It's almost as if *something* was going on that suddenly made the revelation much more damaging.........
I mean it's either that, or you're just an obtuse shill. I'm choosing the benefit of the doubt.
Your blushing hooker wife is embarrassed because your penis is so small. Like throwing a hotdog down a filthy hallway covered in graffiti with even more passed out hookers and syringes lining the floors.
Don't threaten me with a good time!
Your information is outdated. All anti-trust claims were settled in 2014. DeBeers is free to do business in the U.S. and is contemplating direct diamond sales.
Indeed, the best signal in all the land! It sure is nice of the sovereign to ensure service at such times and places.......
Quote: African governments are notorious for interfering with citizens' internet access, particularly around election time or during periods of unrest.
Yea. You may want to take a look closer to home, subs. Western governments have been in on this for some time.
https://www.sfgate.com/news/ar...