Good point. All's fair in love and war, as they say. So why isn't Washington sabre rattling and promising sanctions and other undisclosed actions against China? According to the media, haven't they been busy at cyber-attacks and espionage on a grand scale?
I can see that it's an emotional topic for you and that you have deeply held beliefs about what happened. Being so closely involved and more than likely partisan, as your reaction suggests, puts your views under more pressure than most to be objective about the events prior to the 2014 revolution (or coup depending on your sources of news). I think the best way to find out who's involved and possibly why is to follow the money. The US and some EU member states have poured billions into the Ukraine (via some very shady accounting and avoiding disclosures in order to hide who exactly much of the money went to); something they are unlikely to do without expecting some kind of return on their investment. And the "why"? Possibly because bring the Ukraine into NATO would put them at Russia's doorstep and would also mean billions of dollars in weapons systems sales for the foreseeable future. There's also the strategic military importance of the Crimean peninsula to the Kremlin.
A lot of what happened in the years prior to 2014 look like they came directly from Gene Sharp's booklet "From Dictatorship to Democracy," which BTW was also used in the joint US + Saudi led undermining of the Syrian regime. I can remember some documentary reports of Ukrainian activists openly declaring that they were using the booklet. This has the CIA's fingerprints all over it. It's what they seem to specialise in.
In the world of geopolitics, nothings ever what it seems at face value. Unfortunately, the poor Ukrainian people have had to bear the brunt of this power struggle. They have a saying in India, "When the elephants fight, it's always the grass that suffers most."
The people making the videos or whatever that use the music come under fair use so no, they don't have to pay anything and their activities should be protected by law, i.e. the copyright holders have no right to ask them to stop. However, Facebook place advertising on pages next to user generated content and therefore make money out of it. It's only fair that Facebook shares the proceeds under a reasonable agreement with the copyright holders.
We need a legal fix here more than a technical fix: FRAND licensing for all streamed music.
FRAND (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasonable_and_non-discriminatory_licensing) is probably not the best example in the case of copyright music, since it's not an essential standard or patentable idea. Most user content that includes copyright music more than likely comes under fair use (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use) but the social media site owners are making the money off of it so they're the ones who should pay the royalties. So yes, people engaging in fair use need to be protected and those making money out of copyright material need to pay for it. I doubt that there is an fundamental legal ambiguity here; it's just the big corporations litigating their way to market dominance.
So, Floridians have been selected to be cannon fodder for IT and automotive corporations' experiments. [sarcasm] Live guinea pigs to sacrifice to the almighty IT gods of Silicon Valley, yay![/sarcasm]
Every set top box I've ever seen has come with diagrams showing you which cable to plug in where. It's about the same as hooking up a DVD/Blue-Ray and less complicated than PCs, cable boxes, modems and routers, and hooking up and using receivers. Most people have more than one remote on their coffee table these days.
I detect that some people here are unwilling to accept that malware exists and is causing problems inside Google's walled garden. App stores, including Google's Microsoft's, Apple Inc.'s, and anyone else's must go the way of downloading desktop apps from unverified sources a la 1990's.exe malware, i.e. just don't do it!
I only ever install an app when I've verified exactly who is responsible for it and that they're a trustworthy source, i.e. no back-doors, malware, sneaky telemetry/spyware, unencrypted connections, or serious/careless security flaws (i.e. that the developers are security conscious). That narrows down the list of acceptable apps substantially.
Ah, another manufactured crisis, fictional villains, and nonsensical arguments. Feels like the 80s all over again.
On a similar note, when is the Whitehouse going to issue apologies and offer reparations to all the countries where it directly interfered and even overthrew or attempted to overthrow democratically elected governments, such as Iran, Chile, Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Venezuela, Brazil, Argentina, and Ukraine?
The various branded flavours of Android on phones, tablets, and TVs are often locked into only downloading and installing apps from Google Play and/or their own branded app stores. Installing apps from 3rd parties, i.e. download the package and install it manually, is beyond most users knowledge and capabilities. It's more likely that the malware was installed from Google Play or the branded app store. Their verification and malware screening processes will always be at least a step behind the criminals.
True. It's more a source of annoyance and possibly sabotage than theft. After discovering that it's trivial to read passengers' personal and flight details as well as gain access to online booking from the QR codes on boarding passes, I now shred or archive all my printed travel materials. Certainly, never throw them in the garbage!
The immature defence argument works in two ways: #1 - Don't lock 'em up because diminished responsibility and #2 - Don't lock 'em up because of USA's brutal, dehumanising penal system. We can make the public safety argument in #1, i.e. protect the public from people with diminished responsibility, but we can't argue that traumatising and brutalising children and young adults is in anyone's best interests. We just end up creating generations of hardened criminals who'll never know anything but crime and the penal system throughout their lives. The Thatcher regime tried "short, sharp, shock" with its borstal system in the 1980s. It was such an epic failure and flew in the face of all that is reasonable and humane that it spurred Alan Clarke to write and direct "Scum" in order to bring it to the attention of the British public: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... There was a public outrage and shortly after, the borstal system was shut down.
...Americans jobs disappeared, i.e. when cheap goods started flooding in from Mexico and south-east Asia, we didn't see the Whitehouse do much about that. If anything, they cut spending on social security and education. Will it be any different this time around?
A simple search on Wikipedia.org will give you some starting (startling) statistics and their sources, as well as some of the organisations who help victims of human trafficking. I read that in places like Amsterdam, where prostitution has been legalised and regulated, legitimate prostitutes make up less than 10%. The rest are trafficked from Eastern Europe and elsewhere. If you want to see an account dramatised into a Hollywood movie, you can watch "The Wistleblower" (2010) http://www.imdb.com/title/tt08...
If you really want to know, the information is out there and not difficult to find.
then anything that children have access on for pornography would be blocked," Chumley reportedly said. "We felt like that would be another way to fight human trafficking."
So stopping children from accessing certain websites will reduce human trafficking? Wow, those South Carolina children are hardcore!
We don't need no stinkin' security updates. My fridge and toaster have discovered a new purpose in their lives and are now part of something bigger than themselves. I think it's called something like "Mirai." I'm not sure but they're happy with it so why should anyone tear asunder the joy and meaningfulness that they've found?
Slashdot Mirror
Good point. All's fair in love and war, as they say. So why isn't Washington sabre rattling and promising sanctions and other undisclosed actions against China? According to the media, haven't they been busy at cyber-attacks and espionage on a grand scale?
I can see that it's an emotional topic for you and that you have deeply held beliefs about what happened. Being so closely involved and more than likely partisan, as your reaction suggests, puts your views under more pressure than most to be objective about the events prior to the 2014 revolution (or coup depending on your sources of news). I think the best way to find out who's involved and possibly why is to follow the money. The US and some EU member states have poured billions into the Ukraine (via some very shady accounting and avoiding disclosures in order to hide who exactly much of the money went to); something they are unlikely to do without expecting some kind of return on their investment. And the "why"? Possibly because bring the Ukraine into NATO would put them at Russia's doorstep and would also mean billions of dollars in weapons systems sales for the foreseeable future. There's also the strategic military importance of the Crimean peninsula to the Kremlin.
A lot of what happened in the years prior to 2014 look like they came directly from Gene Sharp's booklet "From Dictatorship to Democracy," which BTW was also used in the joint US + Saudi led undermining of the Syrian regime. I can remember some documentary reports of Ukrainian activists openly declaring that they were using the booklet. This has the CIA's fingerprints all over it. It's what they seem to specialise in.
In the world of geopolitics, nothings ever what it seems at face value. Unfortunately, the poor Ukrainian people have had to bear the brunt of this power struggle. They have a saying in India, "When the elephants fight, it's always the grass that suffers most."
The people making the videos or whatever that use the music come under fair use so no, they don't have to pay anything and their activities should be protected by law, i.e. the copyright holders have no right to ask them to stop. However, Facebook place advertising on pages next to user generated content and therefore make money out of it. It's only fair that Facebook shares the proceeds under a reasonable agreement with the copyright holders.
We need a legal fix here more than a technical fix: FRAND licensing for all streamed music.
FRAND (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasonable_and_non-discriminatory_licensing) is probably not the best example in the case of copyright music, since it's not an essential standard or patentable idea. Most user content that includes copyright music more than likely comes under fair use (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use) but the social media site owners are making the money off of it so they're the ones who should pay the royalties. So yes, people engaging in fair use need to be protected and those making money out of copyright material need to pay for it. I doubt that there is an fundamental legal ambiguity here; it's just the big corporations litigating their way to market dominance.
So, Floridians have been selected to be cannon fodder for IT and automotive corporations' experiments. [sarcasm] Live guinea pigs to sacrifice to the almighty IT gods of Silicon Valley, yay![/sarcasm]
:( Something happened.
Every set top box I've ever seen has come with diagrams showing you which cable to plug in where. It's about the same as hooking up a DVD/Blue-Ray and less complicated than PCs, cable boxes, modems and routers, and hooking up and using receivers. Most people have more than one remote on their coffee table these days.
I detect that some people here are unwilling to accept that malware exists and is causing problems inside Google's walled garden. App stores, including Google's Microsoft's, Apple Inc.'s, and anyone else's must go the way of downloading desktop apps from unverified sources a la 1990's .exe malware, i.e. just don't do it!
I only ever install an app when I've verified exactly who is responsible for it and that they're a trustworthy source, i.e. no back-doors, malware, sneaky telemetry/spyware, unencrypted connections, or serious/careless security flaws (i.e. that the developers are security conscious). That narrows down the list of acceptable apps substantially.
Please read the full comment rather than take individual lines out of context.
Ah, another manufactured crisis, fictional villains, and nonsensical arguments. Feels like the 80s all over again.
On a similar note, when is the Whitehouse going to issue apologies and offer reparations to all the countries where it directly interfered and even overthrew or attempted to overthrow democratically elected governments, such as Iran, Chile, Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Venezuela, Brazil, Argentina, and Ukraine?
All I want is a dumb display!
Amen to that. Is hooking up a cheap media box via HDMI so difficult to do these days?
The various branded flavours of Android on phones, tablets, and TVs are often locked into only downloading and installing apps from Google Play and/or their own branded app stores. Installing apps from 3rd parties, i.e. download the package and install it manually, is beyond most users knowledge and capabilities. It's more likely that the malware was installed from Google Play or the branded app store. Their verification and malware screening processes will always be at least a step behind the criminals.
True. It's more a source of annoyance and possibly sabotage than theft. After discovering that it's trivial to read passengers' personal and flight details as well as gain access to online booking from the QR codes on boarding passes, I now shred or archive all my printed travel materials. Certainly, never throw them in the garbage!
Rubbish! Wherever did you hear that? More people are growing "tomatoes," OK? TOMATOES!
The immature defence argument works in two ways: #1 - Don't lock 'em up because diminished responsibility and #2 - Don't lock 'em up because of USA's brutal, dehumanising penal system. We can make the public safety argument in #1, i.e. protect the public from people with diminished responsibility, but we can't argue that traumatising and brutalising children and young adults is in anyone's best interests. We just end up creating generations of hardened criminals who'll never know anything but crime and the penal system throughout their lives. The Thatcher regime tried "short, sharp, shock" with its borstal system in the 1980s. It was such an epic failure and flew in the face of all that is reasonable and humane that it spurred Alan Clarke to write and direct "Scum" in order to bring it to the attention of the British public: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... There was a public outrage and shortly after, the borstal system was shut down.
Again, I'm not your teacher. BTW, did you book the 5 minute argument or the full half hour? :P
...Americans jobs disappeared, i.e. when cheap goods started flooding in from Mexico and south-east Asia, we didn't see the Whitehouse do much about that. If anything, they cut spending on social security and education. Will it be any different this time around?
You sound like an overly needy student demanding that your teacher do your work for you. I'm not your teacher. Google it for yourself.
A simple search on Wikipedia.org will give you some starting (startling) statistics and their sources, as well as some of the organisations who help victims of human trafficking. I read that in places like Amsterdam, where prostitution has been legalised and regulated, legitimate prostitutes make up less than 10%. The rest are trafficked from Eastern Europe and elsewhere. If you want to see an account dramatised into a Hollywood movie, you can watch "The Wistleblower" (2010) http://www.imdb.com/title/tt08...
If you really want to know, the information is out there and not difficult to find.
You know, I've been wondering whether this human trafficking thing was actually terribly serious problem in the West...
Yes, it is. It's a big problem. Look it up.
then anything that children have access on for pornography would be blocked," Chumley reportedly said. "We felt like that would be another way to fight human trafficking."
So stopping children from accessing certain websites will reduce human trafficking? Wow, those South Carolina children are hardcore!
We don't need no stinkin' security updates. My fridge and toaster have discovered a new purpose in their lives and are now part of something bigger than themselves. I think it's called something like "Mirai." I'm not sure but they're happy with it so why should anyone tear asunder the joy and meaningfulness that they've found?
...pools of sharks or piranha (whichever's in season).
Sorry, sharks are protected species and piranha are out of season. Would you feel safe with a shoal of ill-tempered sea-bass?
Apple Wins In Court, Owes Only $2 Million For Not Giving 21,000 Workers Meal Breaks And Other Abusive And Illegal Employment Practices For 5 Years
There. FTFY
...cable companies want to make the internet work like cable TV.