Really? So you're saying that his opinions of something are trying to shut them down.
Yep. Also this. I'm not defending SJWs or whatever other shenanigans some news organizations are getting into, I just don't pretend like it's only people from one political spectrum that are causing issues.
They're not the ones on university campuses or society trying to shut down speech
I'm pretty sure Trump et al threatening to sue journalists and trying to delegitimize every news source to his left counts as trying to shut down speech.
Frankly they could just force you to buy a ticket by only licensing the movie to be shown in theatres. This is like licensing a product to be sold at Wal-mart and Sears, then telling a bunch of people not to buy the product from Wal-mart because that's not what you intended.
You don't really know much about the abuse, do you?
I know what I've seen discussed here, and that is usually a case of outsourcing an IT function currently provided by employees to an American outsourcing firm, which itself has H1-Bs. That is apparently legal. I don't buy your assertion that the companies getting away with abuse are forging documents, otherwise we'd see more stories like this, and not about people training their replacements and then losing their job.
I don't think this follows the usual narrative of H1-B abuse that most tech companies are doing. What I see most people complaining about is general abuse of what the perceived purpose of the system is, however most of that abuse is perfectly legal within the framework because people have discovered useful loopholes. The idiots in this story were blatantly lying and forging documents.
The name of the company is the only thing that brought me in here. Seriously who would take a name like Dynasoft Synergy seriously? Sounds like the kind of crap that a name-generator would spit out.
Seems like kind of a chicken and egg dilemma to me. A permanent base on the moon with manufacturing capabilities would probably require a massive amount of start-up materials to be launched out there, something that is prohibitively expensive without a better launch mechanism.
I say they stop funding the station and start funding research on a better launch mechanism, like a mass driver or whatever. The main barrier to the development of space is the cost of getting stuff up there. Once we had a launch mechanism with a tiny fraction of the cost-per-launch that we have now, a space station (and everything else) would be far more economical.
I agree it would be nice if any provider could serve any content, but the enormous leap in consumer value that Netflix provides doesn't fizzle away simply because it isn't the perfect consumer solution. Netflix has a long, long way to go before becoming the bad guy in this context, and they already have a huge surplus of good-will having reduced my "cable" bill down to $10, eliminated all commercials, and providing the content on-demand.
I think you'll find that people with good home theater set-ups, and people for whom $30 doesn't even register as an expense overlap considerably.
I'm certainly in that overlap, but can't imagine a scenario where I'd be willing to pay that much for the advanced release. I think the intersection of people who don't plan to see the movie at the theatre, want to see the movie ahead of the otherwise public home-release date, and will spend $30 to stream something once, is small.
When we take kids to the movies, we have to use earplugs because they never turn it down to child-safe levels for children's movies.
In my area some theaters have once-a-week baby-friendly viewings during the day. Generally has about 20-30 mothers toting a baby or young toddler, and they reduce the volume and keep the lighting brighter. I took a day off to go with my wife and it wasn't bad. Maybe they have a similar offer in your area? The caveat of course is that there is the occasional baby crying.
You know there's multiple rows of seats to choose from right? There's a range to choose from you might find enjoyable. I suspect you hate the theatre in general for some reason though.
I have a projector and I like to rub my balls on my awesome sound system.
Good for you.
That made no sense and I could not parse at all what you were trying to say, except for the general concept you were trying to get across of "you are wrong".
I think maybe you're somehow overly offended by my post and your rage has left you unable to parse basic english.
But as noted, you don't even understand that sitting closer to a smaller screen gives an equivalent effect and you consider movie theater audio to be "high tech".
Like I said, some people (apparently you judging by your over-the-top reaction) will like this kind of service, and that's fine. But most people don't have a sound system that they would rub their balls on.
2 seats in a theatre. With a 75 foot screen and high-tech sound.
If you are a family with kids the $30 is a great value
$30 to watch a newish movie in your own home is terrible value when compared to literally every other in-home viewing option. This will interest some folks, but I suspect not very many.
You don't see groundbreakers like Portal or Everquest and WoW now
How do you define ground-breaking? Portal and EQ (great games) weren't super popular, but they are fan-favorites. The only "ground-breaking" game I can think of is Minecraft.
How exactly do these wifi cameras get exposed to public hacking? Are these cameras that you configure to use your own wifi network, and that automatically makes them visible outside your network?
I have two wifi baby monitors in my home, but they both generate their own wifi signal are not on my home network. I am comfortable with the risk that someone could theoretically walk up to my house, hack the (random) factory password, and watch the baby in its crib. Is there some magic I don't know about that connects them to the internet?
Regardless if it is theoretically feasible, the scenario is not practical in any way. In The Moon is a Harsh Mistress, the scenario of hurling rocks at the earth was believable because the moon colony was 100% self-sustaining, it already had a method of launching extremely heavy loads at the earth (agricultural products), and the colony was going to starve to death if they were forced to continue sending so much biomass to the earth. The only reason they didn't all die immediately after their first launch was because the government on earth did not want to wipe out the colony because it was seen as a very valuable asset if they could just regain control.
This is a theoretical problem for next century. At least. If someone brought it up today as an actual issue, that person does not understand the real world.
... I am talking with my friend behind me and don't see that ped on the sidewalk and run into them, knock them down, I'm likely to do more damage to them than most drones... Now, in addition to any civil case she may file against me, do I deserve a month in jail?
If you were on a crowded sidewalk cycling fast enough to potentially kill someone? Absolutely you should be charged. I think you don't understand the dangerous potential a falling 2lb object can have. On a crowded parade street it was almost guaranteed to hit someone, and she was lucky to only get a concussion. Also as one of the links said - if all people will face is a fine, this is going to become a common occurrence.
Yet you twist the truth to blame Trump for a tragedy much longer in the making - sick man, you are as sick as the shooter or heading that way.
What Trump has done is give aggrieved people a convenient scapegoat for their problems. He's a demagogue. Nobody is saying he is the root of these problems, but he's certainly a major factor in the increasing amount of hate and fear directed at immigrants in America, and beyond.
Slashdot Mirror
Competition is bad, I tell you. Only the manufacturers should have the right to sell the product.
So is your argument that everyone should have the right to extract a profit by being a middleman, regardless of your business model?
Really? So you're saying that his opinions of something are trying to shut them down.
Yep. Also this. I'm not defending SJWs or whatever other shenanigans some news organizations are getting into, I just don't pretend like it's only people from one political spectrum that are causing issues.
They're not the ones on university campuses or society trying to shut down speech
I'm pretty sure Trump et al threatening to sue journalists and trying to delegitimize every news source to his left counts as trying to shut down speech.
Frankly they could just force you to buy a ticket by only licensing the movie to be shown in theatres. This is like licensing a product to be sold at Wal-mart and Sears, then telling a bunch of people not to buy the product from Wal-mart because that's not what you intended.
You don't really know much about the abuse, do you?
I know what I've seen discussed here, and that is usually a case of outsourcing an IT function currently provided by employees to an American outsourcing firm, which itself has H1-Bs. That is apparently legal. I don't buy your assertion that the companies getting away with abuse are forging documents, otherwise we'd see more stories like this, and not about people training their replacements and then losing their job.
I don't think this follows the usual narrative of H1-B abuse that most tech companies are doing. What I see most people complaining about is general abuse of what the perceived purpose of the system is, however most of that abuse is perfectly legal within the framework because people have discovered useful loopholes. The idiots in this story were blatantly lying and forging documents.
The name of the company is the only thing that brought me in here. Seriously who would take a name like Dynasoft Synergy seriously? Sounds like the kind of crap that a name-generator would spit out.
Seems like kind of a chicken and egg dilemma to me. A permanent base on the moon with manufacturing capabilities would probably require a massive amount of start-up materials to be launched out there, something that is prohibitively expensive without a better launch mechanism.
I say they stop funding the station and start funding research on a better launch mechanism, like a mass driver or whatever. The main barrier to the development of space is the cost of getting stuff up there. Once we had a launch mechanism with a tiny fraction of the cost-per-launch that we have now, a space station (and everything else) would be far more economical.
I agree it would be nice if any provider could serve any content, but the enormous leap in consumer value that Netflix provides doesn't fizzle away simply because it isn't the perfect consumer solution. Netflix has a long, long way to go before becoming the bad guy in this context, and they already have a huge surplus of good-will having reduced my "cable" bill down to $10, eliminated all commercials, and providing the content on-demand.
I think you'll find that people with good home theater set-ups, and people for whom $30 doesn't even register as an expense overlap considerably.
I'm certainly in that overlap, but can't imagine a scenario where I'd be willing to pay that much for the advanced release. I think the intersection of people who don't plan to see the movie at the theatre, want to see the movie ahead of the otherwise public home-release date, and will spend $30 to stream something once, is small.
When we take kids to the movies, we have to use earplugs because they never turn it down to child-safe levels for children's movies.
In my area some theaters have once-a-week baby-friendly viewings during the day. Generally has about 20-30 mothers toting a baby or young toddler, and they reduce the volume and keep the lighting brighter. I took a day off to go with my wife and it wasn't bad. Maybe they have a similar offer in your area? The caveat of course is that there is the occasional baby crying.
That you have to sit 100 feet away from.
You know there's multiple rows of seats to choose from right? There's a range to choose from you might find enjoyable. I suspect you hate the theatre in general for some reason though.
I have a projector and I like to rub my balls on my awesome sound system.
Good for you.
That made no sense and I could not parse at all what you were trying to say, except for the general concept you were trying to get across of "you are wrong".
I think maybe you're somehow overly offended by my post and your rage has left you unable to parse basic english.
But as noted, you don't even understand that sitting closer to a smaller screen gives an equivalent effect and you consider movie theater audio to be "high tech".
Like I said, some people (apparently you judging by your over-the-top reaction) will like this kind of service, and that's fine. But most people don't have a sound system that they would rub their balls on.
-1? Someone hates Netflix a lot.
$30 is the price for 2 seats.
2 seats in a theatre. With a 75 foot screen and high-tech sound.
If you are a family with kids the $30 is a great value
$30 to watch a newish movie in your own home is terrible value when compared to literally every other in-home viewing option. This will interest some folks, but I suspect not very many.
You don't see groundbreakers like Portal or Everquest and WoW now
How do you define ground-breaking? Portal and EQ (great games) weren't super popular, but they are fan-favorites. The only "ground-breaking" game I can think of is Minecraft.
Link above broken. I assume this is the correct link. And the parent is correct, in this 2015 article Toyota placed #2. Audi happens to be #3.
How exactly do these wifi cameras get exposed to public hacking? Are these cameras that you configure to use your own wifi network, and that automatically makes them visible outside your network?
I have two wifi baby monitors in my home, but they both generate their own wifi signal are not on my home network. I am comfortable with the risk that someone could theoretically walk up to my house, hack the (random) factory password, and watch the baby in its crib. Is there some magic I don't know about that connects them to the internet?
The had the capacity to be self-sustaining, it was moving biomass off the moon that was unsustainable.
And also, I couldn't verify that it was said in the context of being an actual issue and not, as AmiMojo said, just a person talking about stuff.
Since the tweet was deleted I couldn't verify that she actually said it, so I hedged my bets by being vague ;)
Makes you wonder if this would have made it so far if some other candidate had said it.
Regardless if it is theoretically feasible, the scenario is not practical in any way. In The Moon is a Harsh Mistress, the scenario of hurling rocks at the earth was believable because the moon colony was 100% self-sustaining, it already had a method of launching extremely heavy loads at the earth (agricultural products), and the colony was going to starve to death if they were forced to continue sending so much biomass to the earth. The only reason they didn't all die immediately after their first launch was because the government on earth did not want to wipe out the colony because it was seen as a very valuable asset if they could just regain control.
This is a theoretical problem for next century. At least. If someone brought it up today as an actual issue, that person does not understand the real world.
... I am talking with my friend behind me and don't see that ped on the sidewalk and run into them, knock them down, I'm likely to do more damage to them than most drones... Now, in addition to any civil case she may file against me, do I deserve a month in jail?
If you were on a crowded sidewalk cycling fast enough to potentially kill someone? Absolutely you should be charged. I think you don't understand the dangerous potential a falling 2lb object can have. On a crowded parade street it was almost guaranteed to hit someone, and she was lucky to only get a concussion. Also as one of the links said - if all people will face is a fine, this is going to become a common occurrence.
Yet you twist the truth to blame Trump for a tragedy much longer in the making - sick man, you are as sick as the shooter or heading that way.
What Trump has done is give aggrieved people a convenient scapegoat for their problems. He's a demagogue. Nobody is saying he is the root of these problems, but he's certainly a major factor in the increasing amount of hate and fear directed at immigrants in America, and beyond.