and has been for a long time, but it is getting worse.
Well funded interests can influence the politicians to get what they want, in return politicians get (disguised) money or help with re-election (eg a few jobs created in their electoral area).
Those able to put words in front of eyeballs can also do this: not just media magnates but those able to whip up passions -- this is easier in these Internet times (not just Google, Facebook et al but those who can create twitter, etc, storms). Sometimes these activists push for the right thing (eg Rosa Parks), sometimes they are wacky (eg Wakefield on MMR), others push the agenda of a small vocal group to the detriment of others. Fake news is one mechanism for achieving this.
The make politicians & government act in the best interests of the population at large (not just elites & special interests) lobbying & fake news needs to be brought under control, ie regulated. However this is much easier said than done: politicians will resist their side deals; fake news peddlers will attack this. However unless we do so the ''common man'' will never get a fair deal.
It would be nice, but not possible, if their pollution would stay within their national borders. We should bear in mind that we exported pollution to China: they took a lot of our ''recycling'' (ie rubbish), but have recently stopped - rightly making us deal with our own mess.
if the extra air pollution that it will cause would, somehow, be kept within the borders of the USA. It does not: it follows the winds and ends up harming the rest of us. If it did stay within the USA then those who caused it would suffer the consequences; but pollution is a global problem, not a national one - so it upsets me to see those who seemingly put, what they see, as their interests first and do not act in global interests.
Please do not take this as an attack of most who live in the USA, I have friends who live there. Most are good guys who want to behave in a responsible way. It is unfortunate that your current president does not care about the planet, only making money for those who support him.
This is the sort of thing that the EU's GDPR is supposed to address. Hopefully it will provide a model for other jurisdictions, I think that California's Privacy Bill is along the same lines.
The other thing that we badly need are devices that let us lie to apps; show them the profile that we want them to know. It should also be illegal for apps to refuse to work if they detect that they are being lied to.
Every request should have to be approved by a judge. The papers presented by the police should be kept by the courts and made public after a defined time. This would keep the police honest, stop abuse of the system. This will not be perfect, corrupt individuals in tech companies will always be willing to help, either for a fee or some other favour from the police.
How long: 5 years maybe. In long running cases it would be open for the police to petition the court to have them kept secret for another 5 years - 3 judges would be needed to make the order for extension of time.
If two people job share (eg one mornings, the other afternoons) and they thus sit at the same desk and use the same PC: is the cost twice $84 per year ? If so: why ?
who some 17 years ago cracked USA military computers. He wrote a Perl script and looked for blank and default passwords. Not resetting passwords once is stupid; twice is criminal and the penalty should be a dishonourable discharge and loss of pension -- for those at the top of the military; but I expect that, as usual, they will blame a few lowly techies.
In England you don't even need to pay; you can get a 'proof of posting' certificate for no charge if you post the letter at the Post Office counter. The courts will deem the letter received 2 working days later, I have done this many times.
send a letter (paper mail) to the managing director/CEO at their registered head office; then cancel the continuous-authority/direct-debit with your bank.
Most companies hate this as they don't like dealing with paper; however you have given them legal notice. I will do that if they make it hard to cancel, I have better things to do than waste my time trying to talk to someone in a call center.
There is a better solution to 'occasional mistakes' operating in the UK. If you are caught, for instance, a few miles/hour over the limit you are given the option of doing a 1/2 day 'driver awareness' course that costs £70-£110. The benefit is that it is not a conviction so you avoid having points put on your license (get 12 & lose it). There is confusion as to if you need to tell your insurer - but you must if they ask. You are not given the choice if you have taken a course in the last 3 years or your 'mistake' was bad enough.
Given that most web pages these days contain links to SM (Facebook, Twitter,...) often a link to the SM logo or a bit of javascript.
So the person might not knowingly have anything to do with SM but I suspect that their browser downloading these small components will be seen as access to SM and so trigger the day's tax. Now that HTTPS is pervasive it is not possible to determine *what* is being accessed within a web site.
The only way that people are going to be able to avoid this is by installing browser plugins like request policy - which, in itself, is no bad thing.
It is not just that this warning is, to many people, cryptic - but that the warning was only given once. The user clicked and forgot, probably thinking "whatever that was about has gone away and is no longer a problem". This 'status' should remain and be flagged up with whatever control panel the user has - this would give them a chance to review it at a later time. You know what it is like... you buy a new toy and just want to plug it in an see what it does. Once the excitement is over and you are more reflective you *might* try to figure out what that 'status' means.
Years ago it was common for employers to invest in training because they could require the employee to agree to either continue to work for X years, or reimburse the company for the cost of the training if they quit early.
I have had people complain to me that they had been sent on courses in which they had no interest and been asked to pay for them when they left.
An employer should make valued employees want to stay by making working for them attractive. A good wage, pleasant environment, being sent on courses all help to make the employer attractive.
Indeed, it won't be turned off until all those valuable drive time listeners and OAPs get digital radios.
In your eagerness to be rude you have forgotten that in large parts of the country digital radio is not available. The trouble is that many decision makers live in London or large cities, but not everyone does!
OK: that map is 2 years old, but things have not improved much.
the poor, hard working octopus dad is going to get supper home to the kids without a plastic bag? You use them so why should these critters not do as well?:-)
There is a great difference between doing affirmative action by removing barriers that make it hard for some people to compete for some jobs (or whatever) and doing it by erecting barriers to prevent others from applying for the jobs at all. Erecting barriers is actively discriminating; however, with today's warped world view, it is somehow seen acceptable to discriminate against white, straight males; some assumption that all white, straight males are unfairly successful and oppress others in society. Some white, straight males might - most do not; we just want to compete on an equal footing with everyone else.
Little is said about the areas where women out compete men.
As for discrimination against gays, trans, etc I do not see it at all. Never. However I live in England, things might be different in the USA.
Slashdot Mirror
and has been for a long time, but it is getting worse.
Well funded interests can influence the politicians to get what they want, in return politicians get (disguised) money or help with re-election (eg a few jobs created in their electoral area).
Those able to put words in front of eyeballs can also do this: not just media magnates but those able to whip up passions -- this is easier in these Internet times (not just Google, Facebook et al but those who can create twitter, etc, storms). Sometimes these activists push for the right thing (eg Rosa Parks), sometimes they are wacky (eg Wakefield on MMR), others push the agenda of a small vocal group to the detriment of others. Fake news is one mechanism for achieving this.
The make politicians & government act in the best interests of the population at large (not just elites & special interests) lobbying & fake news needs to be brought under control, ie regulated. However this is much easier said than done: politicians will resist their side deals; fake news peddlers will attack this. However unless we do so the ''common man'' will never get a fair deal.
I wonder if their long term goal is, to use NAFTA/CETA/TTIP to push this onto the EU too.
It will take a lot of time to push into the EU, but as a Brit I am concerned about how quickly this sort of thing will happen after Brexit.
We are told The new protocol aims to comprehensively thwart any attempts by the NSA and other eavesdroppers to decrypt intercepted HTTPS connections, but can anyone say for sure that the spooks had not slipped something in ? They have plenty of budget and the ability to make secret court orders.
It would be nice, but not possible, if their pollution would stay within their national borders. We should bear in mind that we exported pollution to China: they took a lot of our ''recycling'' (ie rubbish), but have recently stopped - rightly making us deal with our own mess.
if the extra air pollution that it will cause would, somehow, be kept within the borders of the USA. It does not: it follows the winds and ends up harming the rest of us. If it did stay within the USA then those who caused it would suffer the consequences; but pollution is a global problem, not a national one - so it upsets me to see those who seemingly put, what they see, as their interests first and do not act in global interests.
Please do not take this as an attack of most who live in the USA, I have friends who live there. Most are good guys who want to behave in a responsible way. It is unfortunate that your current president does not care about the planet, only making money for those who support him.
This is the sort of thing that the EU's GDPR is supposed to address. Hopefully it will provide a model for other jurisdictions, I think that California's Privacy Bill is along the same lines.
The other thing that we badly need are devices that let us lie to apps; show them the profile that we want them to know. It should also be illegal for apps to refuse to work if they detect that they are being lied to.
Every request should have to be approved by a judge. The papers presented by the police should be kept by the courts and made public after a defined time. This would keep the police honest, stop abuse of the system. This will not be perfect, corrupt individuals in tech companies will always be willing to help, either for a fee or some other favour from the police.
How long: 5 years maybe. In long running cases it would be open for the police to petition the court to have them kept secret for another 5 years - 3 judges would be needed to make the order for extension of time.
If two people job share (eg one mornings, the other afternoons) and they thus sit at the same desk and use the same PC: is the cost twice $84 per year ? If so: why ?
who some 17 years ago cracked USA military computers. He wrote a Perl script and looked for blank and default passwords. Not resetting passwords once is stupid; twice is criminal and the penalty should be a dishonourable discharge and loss of pension -- for those at the top of the military; but I expect that, as usual, they will blame a few lowly techies.
It seems to me that they are collecting data about the protesters that is not relevant to the purpose of dealing with illegal activity. This is a violation of the GDPR that says that the personal data you are processing is limited to what is necessary – you do not hold more than you need for that purpose.. It would be interesting to see the protesters make a GDPR complaint about Eclipse Strategic Security; even more interesting to see how the ICO tries to avoid doing anything about it.
There is confusion as to if you need to tell your insurer - but you must if they ask.
There is no confusion. You don't have to tell them.
Some insurers insurers usually operate a “catch all” clause in their policies about keeping them informed about factors which may affect your driving, and failing to declare a course could lead them to cancel cover in the event of an accident
In England you don't even need to pay; you can get a 'proof of posting' certificate for no charge if you post the letter at the Post Office counter. The courts will deem the letter received 2 working days later, I have done this many times.
send a letter (paper mail) to the managing director/CEO at their registered head office; then cancel the continuous-authority/direct-debit with your bank. Most companies hate this as they don't like dealing with paper; however you have given them legal notice. I will do that if they make it hard to cancel, I have better things to do than waste my time trying to talk to someone in a call center.
There is a better solution to 'occasional mistakes' operating in the UK. If you are caught, for instance, a few miles/hour over the limit you are given the option of doing a 1/2 day 'driver awareness' course that costs £70-£110. The benefit is that it is not a conviction so you avoid having points put on your license (get 12 & lose it). There is confusion as to if you need to tell your insurer - but you must if they ask. You are not given the choice if you have taken a course in the last 3 years or your 'mistake' was bad enough.
Given that most web pages these days contain links to SM (Facebook, Twitter, ...) often a link to the SM logo or a bit of javascript.
So the person might not knowingly have anything to do with SM but I suspect that their browser downloading these small components will be seen as access to SM and so trigger the day's tax. Now that HTTPS is pervasive it is not possible to determine *what* is being accessed within a web site.
The only way that people are going to be able to avoid this is by installing browser plugins like request policy - which, in itself, is no bad thing.
It is not just that this warning is, to many people, cryptic - but that the warning was only given once. The user clicked and forgot, probably thinking "whatever that was about has gone away and is no longer a problem". This 'status' should remain and be flagged up with whatever control panel the user has - this would give them a chance to review it at a later time. You know what it is like ... you buy a new toy and just want to plug it in an see what it does. Once the excitement is over and you are more reflective you *might* try to figure out what that 'status' means.
for all the lawyers involved.
This is use of personal data. Has linked in sought permission to use the data in this way and then share it with recruiters ?
Years ago it was common for employers to invest in training because they could require the employee to agree to either continue to work for X years, or reimburse the company for the cost of the training if they quit early.
I have had people complain to me that they had been sent on courses in which they had no interest and been asked to pay for them when they left.
An employer should make valued employees want to stay by making working for them attractive. A good wage, pleasant environment, being sent on courses all help to make the employer attractive.
sales of Ronald Reagan masks near the border are up 1000%.
Indeed, it won't be turned off until all those valuable drive time listeners and OAPs get digital radios.
In your eagerness to be rude you have forgotten that in large parts of the country digital radio is not available. The trouble is that many decision makers live in London or large cities, but not everyone does!
OK: that map is 2 years old, but things have not improved much.
a tin foil hat for my car!
the poor, hard working octopus dad is going to get supper home to the kids without a plastic bag? You use them so why should these critters not do as well? :-)
Transaction 1: $10,000 buy the car wheels and chassis; Transaction 2: $10,000 buy the engine; Transaction 3: $10,000 buy the rest of the car.
There is a great difference between doing affirmative action by removing barriers that make it hard for some people to compete for some jobs (or whatever) and doing it by erecting barriers to prevent others from applying for the jobs at all. Erecting barriers is actively discriminating; however, with today's warped world view, it is somehow seen acceptable to discriminate against white, straight males; some assumption that all white, straight males are unfairly successful and oppress others in society. Some white, straight males might - most do not; we just want to compete on an equal footing with everyone else.
Little is said about the areas where women out compete men.
As for discrimination against gays, trans, etc I do not see it at all. Never. However I live in England, things might be different in the USA.