Maybe you completely missed the "they're both severe problems" part of what I said?
What I said was that they ARE different, because only the commercial one has any hope of a legislative fix. The government MAY outlaw companies collecting your data for profit (in many countries they have) but they'll NEVER outlaw themselves looking at all of it.
Additionally, if you find a technical means of preventing companies from spying on you, the government won't care, but if you find a technical means of stopping the government from spying on you, once enough people use it, it WILL be outlawed.
You may think they're the same issue, but if you try to attack them as one issue you'll be sorely disappointed.
The IP is still something not everyone wants to share.
If it's public information which building you walk in to, and one of the tenants of that building is known to be in a business you don't want it to be publicized that you attend, you may not be happy that everyone knows you're in that building, even if there's no proof as to which tenant you visited. (and that's optimistic that from IP and the TLS handshake that they can't figure out the tenant, it's more likely they'd know which tenant, but not which room in their suite)
While the 2 are related, and they are both severe problems, they are also very different issues.
The government snoops on you to find some reason to prosecute you. Companies snoop on you to find some way to part you from your money.
the "nothing to hide" camp has no issue with the former, but may still hate the latter. While some of the "freedom from government tyranny" types have no problem with the latter, but hate the former.
No legislative solution is ever likely to target both at the same time (and if we're truly honest, no legislative solution is ever likely to touch the first at all, and the cynic in me says that it would only likely pay lip service to the second)
The good news is that if a technical solution is ever found, it would apply equally to both. The bad news is that if it were ever to be widely adopted the government would likely outlaw it.
Unlikely, many of the advertising networks can already track almost everything you do today anyway, so don't expect an improvement.
At work they blocked the installation of any browser extensions, which means all our web browsing includes ads (horrible corporate policy by the way) What happens though is that I search for a product, buy that product, and then for the next several months see ads for something that I already bought. I don't need 2 of them, so you're wasting your time advertising it to me again!
I work at home more than 80% of the time, When I do have to be in an office my productivity tanks. Most of the day is filled with idle chat instead of actual work.
The USA hasn't actually figured out that the world is made up of different countries at all. They think it's all the USA, just some parts don't get to vote.
You could certainly claim legitimate uses though. You're worried that if a thief breaks in and steals your stuff you didn't want them to have access to all your banking information too, so you set up the dead-man hardware to trigger as soon as anything is powered down or moved. Now there could be some claim that you should have told the police, but in many of these cases there's no time you really would have had the chance to do so as they likely took you out of the house before they started bagging everything.
The people in power keep using the "if you have nothing to hide" argument, while grabbing more and more power. The people who aren't in power are too busy watching some random sporting event, or the Kardashians to care because they falsely believe that those in power are keeping them safe from the boogeyman... errr.. "terrorists" and "child pornographers"
I pointed that out many times when Google Glass first came out, that consumers were completely the wrong market for it, and that it would be much more likely to be a hit in commercial or industrial applications.
People told me I didn't know what I was talking about...
It could simply have been, we'll disclose this to you, if you promise not to sue us for posting it publicly after 90 days. That would be quite reasonable.
You'r rushing to judge them without all the facts. But that's in vogue these days.
I work primarily from home, when I do go in to "the office" it's random times and durations, and one of about a dozen different physical locations.
If you asked me to give one specific location I wouldn't have been able to... but google still picked one, and as it turns out upon review, it really is the most appropriate of the locations.
It's rather frightening when you realize that Google knows where your office is better than you do yourself.
And that's exactly how every law I've read around here looks. usually in a case like this, the sentence in the law would simply refer you to an appendix with a list of excluded tasks/professions, and that appendix would be a bulleted or numbered list.
When designing a safety system, the logic and programming of the machines is 100% irrelevant. You assume right away that the programming and logic employed is wrong and will fail. You look instead at where the robot can physically reach. If it can physically reach where the person will be working, it needs to be powered down or physically blocked. No exceptions. If there's 2 robots, 10, or 100 is irrelevant. you power down anything that could potentially be a problem.
It's only complicated if you're more worried about profit and productivity than you are about safety, and that's what gets people (like this one) killed.
And there's the disconnect. Fibre isn't a separate service here, it's a different way of providing the same service. Do if you sign up for the minimum tier, it will be on whatever technology is available. (pay for 15 meg, get whatever your line is capable of up to that speed) So even if you only had 3 meg before, you wouldn't pay any more for 15 meg on fibre as you paid for 3 meg on copper. That said, fibre is being installed mostly in towns and cities, where most people could already get 25meg or higher service on copper.
Farmers and people on acreages aren't (yet) affected.
Of course, if you're willing to wait a few weeks to go, why not wait a couple more weeks and watch it at home with a better experience? Remember, the only thing theatres still have going for them is that they get the movies before they're available at home. If you're willing to wait, why go to a theatre at all?
Experienced people are actually the most likely to miss important safety steps. They get complacent and think they know better. After all, they've never had a problem yet...
At my theatres you'd be between 5-10 minutes late to miss the unrelated products and only have to see the movie previews. If you show up about 15 minutes late you're probably right on time, but you'll piss off everyone in the theatre who's already been seated forever.
I don't think theatres understand who their competition is. It's no longer other theatres, it's watching movies at home. And right now the ONLY advantage the theatres have is earlier release dates. Today's home setups have better image quality, better sound quality, better seating, better food and drink, and a better overall experience. Gone are the days where the alternative to the theatre was a 24" CRT connected to a VHS machine.
Slashdot Mirror
ok, this is semantics, the host is close enough to the URL for most purposes.
If you're seen visiting known-terrorist-conspiracy-site, do you really care if they know what exact page you loaded?
You think a 90 year old grandma is going to use your tool?
If she's that tech-savy, the FBI will have no problem arresting her.
Maybe you completely missed the "they're both severe problems" part of what I said?
What I said was that they ARE different, because only the commercial one has any hope of a legislative fix. The government MAY outlaw companies collecting your data for profit (in many countries they have) but they'll NEVER outlaw themselves looking at all of it.
Additionally, if you find a technical means of preventing companies from spying on you, the government won't care, but if you find a technical means of stopping the government from spying on you, once enough people use it, it WILL be outlawed.
You may think they're the same issue, but if you try to attack them as one issue you'll be sorely disappointed.
The IP is still something not everyone wants to share.
If it's public information which building you walk in to, and one of the tenants of that building is known to be in a business you don't want it to be publicized that you attend, you may not be happy that everyone knows you're in that building, even if there's no proof as to which tenant you visited. (and that's optimistic that from IP and the TLS handshake that they can't figure out the tenant, it's more likely they'd know which tenant, but not which room in their suite)
Ok, not the full URL, but they still know who you are connecting to, which is something not everyone wants shared.
If many people are using this tool, they'll arrest all of them. The FBI has, for the purposes of our discussion here, unlimited resources.
Now what happens if just one of those "LOT of connections" hits an FBI honeypot child porn site?
HTTPS helps to mitigate the problem, even though it doesn't solve it.
They still get the URL, but nothing more. I'd rather they didn't get the URL either, but at least they don't get the content.
While the 2 are related, and they are both severe problems, they are also very different issues.
The government snoops on you to find some reason to prosecute you.
Companies snoop on you to find some way to part you from your money.
the "nothing to hide" camp has no issue with the former, but may still hate the latter. While some of the "freedom from government tyranny" types have no problem with the latter, but hate the former.
No legislative solution is ever likely to target both at the same time (and if we're truly honest, no legislative solution is ever likely to touch the first at all, and the cynic in me says that it would only likely pay lip service to the second)
The good news is that if a technical solution is ever found, it would apply equally to both. The bad news is that if it were ever to be widely adopted the government would likely outlaw it.
Unlikely, many of the advertising networks can already track almost everything you do today anyway, so don't expect an improvement.
At work they blocked the installation of any browser extensions, which means all our web browsing includes ads (horrible corporate policy by the way) What happens though is that I search for a product, buy that product, and then for the next several months see ads for something that I already bought. I don't need 2 of them, so you're wasting your time advertising it to me again!
I work at home more than 80% of the time, When I do have to be in an office my productivity tanks. Most of the day is filled with idle chat instead of actual work.
The USA hasn't actually figured out that the world is made up of different countries at all. They think it's all the USA, just some parts don't get to vote.
You could certainly claim legitimate uses though.
You're worried that if a thief breaks in and steals your stuff you didn't want them to have access to all your banking information too, so you set up the dead-man hardware to trigger as soon as anything is powered down or moved.
Now there could be some claim that you should have told the police, but in many of these cases there's no time you really would have had the chance to do so as they likely took you out of the house before they started bagging everything.
For images it doesn't matter what his age was, only hers.
For various "activities" the ages come in to play.
In brief, yes.
The people in power keep using the "if you have nothing to hide" argument, while grabbing more and more power.
The people who aren't in power are too busy watching some random sporting event, or the Kardashians to care because they falsely believe that those in power are keeping them safe from the boogeyman... errr.. "terrorists" and "child pornographers"
I pointed that out many times when Google Glass first came out, that consumers were completely the wrong market for it, and that it would be much more likely to be a hit in commercial or industrial applications.
People told me I didn't know what I was talking about...
Depends what the agreement is.
It could simply have been, we'll disclose this to you, if you promise not to sue us for posting it publicly after 90 days. That would be quite reasonable.
You'r rushing to judge them without all the facts. But that's in vogue these days.
I work primarily from home, when I do go in to "the office" it's random times and durations, and one of about a dozen different physical locations.
If you asked me to give one specific location I wouldn't have been able to... but google still picked one, and as it turns out upon review, it really is the most appropriate of the locations.
It's rather frightening when you realize that Google knows where your office is better than you do yourself.
And that's exactly how every law I've read around here looks. usually in a case like this, the sentence in the law would simply refer you to an appendix with a list of excluded tasks/professions, and that appendix would be a bulleted or numbered list.
When designing a safety system, the logic and programming of the machines is 100% irrelevant. You assume right away that the programming and logic employed is wrong and will fail.
You look instead at where the robot can physically reach. If it can physically reach where the person will be working, it needs to be powered down or physically blocked. No exceptions. If there's 2 robots, 10, or 100 is irrelevant. you power down anything that could potentially be a problem.
It's only complicated if you're more worried about profit and productivity than you are about safety, and that's what gets people (like this one) killed.
And there's the disconnect. Fibre isn't a separate service here, it's a different way of providing the same service. Do if you sign up for the minimum tier, it will be on whatever technology is available. (pay for 15 meg, get whatever your line is capable of up to that speed)
So even if you only had 3 meg before, you wouldn't pay any more for 15 meg on fibre as you paid for 3 meg on copper.
That said, fibre is being installed mostly in towns and cities, where most people could already get 25meg or higher service on copper.
Farmers and people on acreages aren't (yet) affected.
Which in turn is a strong indicator that they don't have a case at all....
Of course, if you're willing to wait a few weeks to go, why not wait a couple more weeks and watch it at home with a better experience? Remember, the only thing theatres still have going for them is that they get the movies before they're available at home. If you're willing to wait, why go to a theatre at all?
Experienced people are actually the most likely to miss important safety steps. They get complacent and think they know better. After all, they've never had a problem yet...
At my theatres you'd be between 5-10 minutes late to miss the unrelated products and only have to see the movie previews.
If you show up about 15 minutes late you're probably right on time, but you'll piss off everyone in the theatre who's already been seated forever.
I don't think theatres understand who their competition is. It's no longer other theatres, it's watching movies at home. And right now the ONLY advantage the theatres have is earlier release dates. Today's home setups have better image quality, better sound quality, better seating, better food and drink, and a better overall experience.
Gone are the days where the alternative to the theatre was a 24" CRT connected to a VHS machine.