So, yeah -- hate corporate douchebags and morons, can't fault anybody who gets product promotion by actually proving the product works and giving the results for free to a high profile bit of free software to make it better. Who knew?
I don't hate the entire world, just huge swaths of it made up of assholes and idiots. The good bits still make me happy, but we seldom see those.
Maybe it's a coherent outrage based on moral principles and reasoned thought? That, or the meds finally worked today, who knows.
Slashdot posts plenty of things which require outrage -- this particular "Slashvertisement" is pretty much the exact opposite. It's showing you have something of value by proving it works, and contributing to something and making it better. If that leads to sales and revenue, best of luck.
So, world -- "philanth-ver-tize" more, and grumpy, bitter old men might say "wow, that's awesome". Go ahead, I fucking dare you to give us a few things to be positive about.;-)
You know, if you want "free" advertising by doing free code analysis against a piece of free software, publish your results openly, and give them the output to the project to actually use to improve that project... you're bloody welcome to some free advertising.
Depending on the software you write, and what you use it for... $5k for a development tool isn't that crazy stupid.
One with proven results against a known piece of software and which contributes to eliminate bugs in a provable way and gives those results freely to open source?
Oh, hell yeah, bring on the free advertising for more companies like this. And hopefully people are thinking "holy crap, if they found over a 1000 questionable pieces in the FreeBSD kernel, imagine what they can do with my stuff".
I say kudos to these guys, and any "free" advertising (beyond their time invested and the value of giving back to the FreeBSD project) is deservedly theirs.
Fun fact; In the entire history of modern skyscrapers there have only been three situations where a building has collapsed into it's own foot print as a result of a fire.
Yeah, and just how many other buildings have had a fully loaded airliner full of fuel go crashing into them as the start of that fire?
What's that? None?
Sorry, but the giant holes caused by the crashing planes and the sustained fire from a full load of fuel is pretty different from any other building fire ever.
Watching an airplane fly into the building and then cause the fire is very different from anything else... I was watching live, and I aint no engineer, but I turned to someone and said "this building is going to collapse any time now"... the mechanical damage and fire left an awful lot of structure with an ever-decreasing amount of support.
So, tell me, in the entire history of modern skyscrapers... exactly how many have had airliners crash into them?
It amazes me that most American still believe their government's official story of 9/11. Elsewhere in the world, people generally accepted the US government blew up their own buildings.
Why would you need to believe that?
As a non-American who ended up watching the second plane go in live and (sadly) predicted the tower collapse a few minutes in advance... the events as they unfolded in no way shape or form need an alternate explanation.
So, either you need to believe some wacky shit, or I've been successfully trolled.
But the airplanes crashing into building and lighting fire and then collapsing thing? Yeah, saw that happen in real time... that is totally what happened to any sane observer.
I don't trust that this is an accurate representation of what the treaty actually says
I'm sorry, but what?
Have you missed the part where every treaty the US is involved in pushes corporate interests because the US government is in the back pocket of the copyright cartel?
The US lets the copyright lobby write the text of laws and treaties, and does what they're told. The US government is on the fucking payroll... and I really wish I was exaggerating.
The US wouldn't be negotiating a treaty which didn't push draconian copyright measures. That's kind of what they do these days.
Once again, a company has issued overreaching copyright claims with no penalty or consequence for harming an innocent part
Of course they don't have any consequences.
They got exactly the fucking laws they bought, ones with they can make unfounded accusations with no burden of proof, and which people are expected to jump to and enforce or face their own penalties... make no mistake about it, this is exactly what they wanted, and exactly what they got.
And, they've managed to get the US government on the fucking payroll to ensure every other damned country has the same absurd bullshit. And companies like YouTube pretty much have to jump and say "yessir boss".
The DMCA and related laws are supposed to give them all the power, and no accountability. That's what they paid for, that's what they got.
This is what was said when it was happening, and this is what has been said ever since. But let's not pretend this is the first we're learning about just how defective these laws are.
These damned laws a broken by design, because they were written by and for the copyright cartel, and the rest of us can go get stuffed.
Blame the idiot politicians who gave this shit to them -- Sony and these guys? They paid those clowns fair and square. And they keep delivering in the form of even more fucking broken garbage, like the IP provisions in the TPP which will more or less the USA in championing the rights of multinational corporations like the puppets they are.
Hell, DHS (and by extension ICE) are now the enforcement arm of the copyright cartel. Welcome to the awesome future where corporations have more rights than you do.
It's a car for hire service, it isn't your buddy giving you a ride because he's going in the same direction.
It's a fucking commercial car service, claiming it's a ride sharing service is complete bullshit. By definition it's not "ride sharing". It's a car, for hire... the rest is semantic horseshit.
You're a commercial vehicle for hire, like it or not, you need a commercial license, commercial insurance, and have to adhere to the applicable laws covering a commercial vehicle for hire.
No amount of sophistry and smearing of unicorn poop magically fucking changes any of this.
So, purely to play Devil's advocate... if you have a car loan, is your bank entitled to monitor you?
Is your spouse always entitled to monitor you?
What about the police? Because, after all, there are legal implications if you hurt someone.
How far do we extend the list of people who should allowed to spy on you? I'm curious? Are you advocating all forms of surveillance, or just when you do it?
The new 'features' added will allow you to receive alerts if the target vehicle leaves a predetermined area, drives faster than a preset level, its location, and keeps a history of all the above for later review.
All of which will be legally accessible by the government, without warrant as it will be business records of Verizon.
And, of course, your divorce lawyer will be able to subpoena it.
And if you get into an accident it will get called in to make sure you weren't at the bar.
Anybody signing up for this should recognize just how stupid this is, and just how much this is going to be accessible to everybody who demands it.
Yet another bit of the connected society I would never want any part of. Signing yourself up to this is basically going to allow dozens of other parties to be able to know everything you do.
How so? The entire rest of their business model is.
Decreeing you're not covered by regulations because you say so is pretty much all unicorn shit. The entire company is predicated on wishful thinking and unicorn shit, and loudly saying "la la la, we're not a cab company".
It must be awesome to be able to just unilaterally decree that the magical unicorn shit makes you exempt from any regulations you wish didn't apply.
Or has the definition of ride sharing changed to mean directly contacting someone to have them pick you up at a specific location so you can be driven to a location where the person was not otherwise going
Pretty much "ride sharing" in this context means "illegal cab company who decrees they aren't covered by regulations because they have doused themselves in unicorn piss".
Nothing about Uber is a ride sharing service, it's a bootleg cab company. Their insistence on an alternate reality is bullshit, in all contexts.
And, the US (and US made products) will irrevocably cease to be trustworthy.
Once the US does this, everyone in the world MUST assume these companies have built this in, that the US government can access it, and that Apple will be forced to roll over for any other government.
I'm not sure people understand just how much of a global clusterfuck of undermining rights and freedoms the US is doing here -- it's time to stop pretending to be champions of freedom and liberty when you have actively decided to do the opposite.
If Apple caves on this, every piss-pot dictator will insist on the same access.
What the FBI is demanding is full Big Brother status.
And until companies bear legal liability for these kinds of things they fail to fix, assume it will keep happening.
Running an e-commerce site with a year old known flaw? Sorry, that's either negligence or incompetence. In neither case should you be trusted to run an e-commerce site.
The internet is a cesspool of terrible security, and I don't see that changing as long as companies just utterly fail to keep on top of this stuff.
Slashdot Mirror
Really, you expect honesty from malware writers? :-P
LOL ... aww, that's sweet.
So, yeah -- hate corporate douchebags and morons, can't fault anybody who gets product promotion by actually proving the product works and giving the results for free to a high profile bit of free software to make it better. Who knew?
I don't hate the entire world, just huge swaths of it made up of assholes and idiots. The good bits still make me happy, but we seldom see those.
Maybe it's a coherent outrage based on moral principles and reasoned thought? That, or the meds finally worked today, who knows.
Slashdot posts plenty of things which require outrage -- this particular "Slashvertisement" is pretty much the exact opposite. It's showing you have something of value by proving it works, and contributing to something and making it better. If that leads to sales and revenue, best of luck.
So, world -- "philanth-ver-tize" more, and grumpy, bitter old men might say "wow, that's awesome". Go ahead, I fucking dare you to give us a few things to be positive about. ;-)
Cheers
You know, if you want "free" advertising by doing free code analysis against a piece of free software, publish your results openly, and give them the output to the project to actually use to improve that project ... you're bloody welcome to some free advertising.
Depending on the software you write, and what you use it for ... $5k for a development tool isn't that crazy stupid.
One with proven results against a known piece of software and which contributes to eliminate bugs in a provable way and gives those results freely to open source?
Oh, hell yeah, bring on the free advertising for more companies like this. And hopefully people are thinking "holy crap, if they found over a 1000 questionable pieces in the FreeBSD kernel, imagine what they can do with my stuff".
I say kudos to these guys, and any "free" advertising (beyond their time invested and the value of giving back to the FreeBSD project) is deservedly theirs.
Yeah, and just how many other buildings have had a fully loaded airliner full of fuel go crashing into them as the start of that fire?
What's that? None?
Sorry, but the giant holes caused by the crashing planes and the sustained fire from a full load of fuel is pretty different from any other building fire ever.
Watching an airplane fly into the building and then cause the fire is very different from anything else ... I was watching live, and I aint no engineer, but I turned to someone and said "this building is going to collapse any time now" ... the mechanical damage and fire left an awful lot of structure with an ever-decreasing amount of support.
So, tell me, in the entire history of modern skyscrapers ... exactly how many have had airliners crash into them?
That's kind of amazing. We've all heard about it being theoretically true, and assumed it was totally implausible.
Scary, and a little too sci-fi turned real.
Why would you need to believe that?
As a non-American who ended up watching the second plane go in live and (sadly) predicted the tower collapse a few minutes in advance ... the events as they unfolded in no way shape or form need an alternate explanation.
So, either you need to believe some wacky shit, or I've been successfully trolled.
But the airplanes crashing into building and lighting fire and then collapsing thing? Yeah, saw that happen in real time ... that is totally what happened to any sane observer.
I'm sorry, but what?
Have you missed the part where every treaty the US is involved in pushes corporate interests because the US government is in the back pocket of the copyright cartel?
The US lets the copyright lobby write the text of laws and treaties, and does what they're told. The US government is on the fucking payroll ... and I really wish I was exaggerating.
The US wouldn't be negotiating a treaty which didn't push draconian copyright measures. That's kind of what they do these days.
Of course they don't have any consequences.
They got exactly the fucking laws they bought, ones with they can make unfounded accusations with no burden of proof, and which people are expected to jump to and enforce or face their own penalties ... make no mistake about it, this is exactly what they wanted, and exactly what they got.
And, they've managed to get the US government on the fucking payroll to ensure every other damned country has the same absurd bullshit. And companies like YouTube pretty much have to jump and say "yessir boss".
The DMCA and related laws are supposed to give them all the power, and no accountability. That's what they paid for, that's what they got.
This is what was said when it was happening, and this is what has been said ever since. But let's not pretend this is the first we're learning about just how defective these laws are.
These damned laws a broken by design, because they were written by and for the copyright cartel, and the rest of us can go get stuffed.
Blame the idiot politicians who gave this shit to them -- Sony and these guys? They paid those clowns fair and square. And they keep delivering in the form of even more fucking broken garbage, like the IP provisions in the TPP which will more or less the USA in championing the rights of multinational corporations like the puppets they are.
Hell, DHS (and by extension ICE) are now the enforcement arm of the copyright cartel. Welcome to the awesome future where corporations have more rights than you do.
Really? A terebyte?
Come on guys, at least try.
It's a car for hire service, it isn't your buddy giving you a ride because he's going in the same direction.
It's a fucking commercial car service, claiming it's a ride sharing service is complete bullshit. By definition it's not "ride sharing". It's a car, for hire ... the rest is semantic horseshit.
You're a commercial vehicle for hire, like it or not, you need a commercial license, commercial insurance, and have to adhere to the applicable laws covering a commercial vehicle for hire.
No amount of sophistry and smearing of unicorn poop magically fucking changes any of this.
Depends entirely on what it's a GIF of, and there's always always always a lawyer lurking.
Are you suggesting that Twitter magically has copyright to every GIF ever posted to Twitter? I'm betting they don't.
You can have a GIF of pretty much anything, including things which are copyrighted.
Why do you think he's a smoker who drives while angry?
I think you mis-spelled "doomed".
So, whose GIFs can you share? Surely sharing on Twitter to share a GIF doesn't give Twitter and the rest of the world the right to use it?
Twitter seems to be assuming anything posted is fair game for everybody else to reuse.
So, you were looking at porn while driving, then? ;-)
So, purely to play Devil's advocate ... if you have a car loan, is your bank entitled to monitor you?
Is your spouse always entitled to monitor you?
What about the police? Because, after all, there are legal implications if you hurt someone.
How far do we extend the list of people who should allowed to spy on you? I'm curious? Are you advocating all forms of surveillance, or just when you do it?
Because the surveillance society is exactly this.
LOL, a teenager, leaving their phone at home? That's hilarious.
Oh, and this is an in-car device as I read TFA ... this isn't bugging the kid's phone, it's bugging the entire car.
Have you ever met a teenager?
Because, my recollection of being one is everything you said is utterly false.
Part of being a teenager, apparently, is finding your own stupid things to do, regardless of what parents have done.
All of which will be legally accessible by the government, without warrant as it will be business records of Verizon.
And, of course, your divorce lawyer will be able to subpoena it.
And if you get into an accident it will get called in to make sure you weren't at the bar.
Anybody signing up for this should recognize just how stupid this is, and just how much this is going to be accessible to everybody who demands it.
Yet another bit of the connected society I would never want any part of. Signing yourself up to this is basically going to allow dozens of other parties to be able to know everything you do.
Oddly, my first sentence was "And, the US (and US made products) will irrevocably cease to be trustworthy.".
That was kind of my point.
How so? The entire rest of their business model is.
Decreeing you're not covered by regulations because you say so is pretty much all unicorn shit. The entire company is predicated on wishful thinking and unicorn shit, and loudly saying "la la la, we're not a cab company".
It must be awesome to be able to just unilaterally decree that the magical unicorn shit makes you exempt from any regulations you wish didn't apply.
Pretty much "ride sharing" in this context means "illegal cab company who decrees they aren't covered by regulations because they have doused themselves in unicorn piss".
Nothing about Uber is a ride sharing service, it's a bootleg cab company. Their insistence on an alternate reality is bullshit, in all contexts.
And, the US (and US made products) will irrevocably cease to be trustworthy.
Once the US does this, everyone in the world MUST assume these companies have built this in, that the US government can access it, and that Apple will be forced to roll over for any other government.
I'm not sure people understand just how much of a global clusterfuck of undermining rights and freedoms the US is doing here -- it's time to stop pretending to be champions of freedom and liberty when you have actively decided to do the opposite.
If Apple caves on this, every piss-pot dictator will insist on the same access.
What the FBI is demanding is full Big Brother status.
LOL, brilliant ... that'll show your IoT devices what for. Take away the Internet part, and they're just things.
Might I suggest not connecting them to the network either? That'll keep them secure.
Or, you know, just don't buy them.
And until companies bear legal liability for these kinds of things they fail to fix, assume it will keep happening.
Running an e-commerce site with a year old known flaw? Sorry, that's either negligence or incompetence. In neither case should you be trusted to run an e-commerce site.
The internet is a cesspool of terrible security, and I don't see that changing as long as companies just utterly fail to keep on top of this stuff.