I'm an MS user, and just switched to Linux for my web/email machine. I found Mint to easy to use, although not as smooth as Windows. Ubuntu was ok, but their fascination with brown themes never caught my interest. Others like Red Hat, Debian, Suse etc seem more focused towards server/nerd end of the market, so Mint it is for now.
From what I've been reading, it doesn't matter if you turn off Automatic Updates or not, it still goes right ahead and downloads and attempts to install itself.. just like any other malware.
I've been a bit of a MS supporter (check my post history), and brushed off most of the criticism around the MS-hate. However the tracking behaviour of Win10 has crossed the line. I've just upgraded my Win7 laptop to Linux Mint (I still find it clunky, but does the job for web/email). I can no longer support a company that disregards its customer's privacy so blatantly.
I've heard of people pretending to be celibate. Like Catholic ministers, who somehow also seem to be the largest segment of the community into kiddie sex. See any pattern there?
And I will reiterate that I am not saying we shouldn't try to reduce gun violence. I'm not a "gun rights person". I don't own a gun. I am a person who doesn't like to see public policy being guided by emotion rather than reason.
I think the elephant in the room is that the US, being a modern western democracy, is compared to other modern western democracies, and the glaring difference between them is the third world gun violence rate. So logically, some people would like to try and fix that.
Second on the list is probably the road deaths, because that also stands out as way above everyone else. It seems your love for the concept of freedom (not actual freedom, because it's hard to be free if you are dead) far outweighs common sense (ie attitudes to seatbelts, helmets, and guns).
You must hang out with different people than I do. Most men I've met, once you break down the wall of political correctness and manners that society seem to shackle us all with, share similar views about pussy. We all love it, and would do anything to get more of it. In having a connection to the sex industry (legal where I live), the biggest market is men around 35-55, because they tend to ignore social stereotypes and listen to their bodies instead.
My gay friends share similar views about dick or ass, although society doesn't have the same expectation of them to behave a certain way, so they are a lot more open about.
I'm not aware of any pedos in my circle, but can only assume they have the same needs and desires about their sexual bent, which none of us have much control over.
Probably also worth noting I met a guy once who I thought was gay, but he claimed to be asexual. He said he had no sexual desires for either men or women, he was just stuck in neutral. That's the thing with biology, it runs the full spectrum, but you have no say in it.
Second, we need programs that regularly send out so much fake data that this tracking is rendered useless.
I agree. Most of us work in IT so know the horror that awaits us as we go down this path, but Joe Sixpack just doesn't seem to care. I can now understand how the switched-on people in Germany must've felt while they watched their countrymen support a psychopath who sold the dream, but instead delivered misery and death.
We may not suffer quite as bad a fate, but I can't see any scenario in which this is a net win for the public as a whole.
Every year, thousands of children are hurt and dozens are killed because a driver, usually a parent, backing up didn't see them.
And we have regulations to try and control this, so why not apply the same logic to guns? Or is your solution that if we simply removed all road rules, enforced a constitutional right to drive automobiles, there'd be no more deaths on the road?
Say no to Automobile regulations!!!
So, I find that there are generally two arguments:
--You can't take my guns
--Ban all the guns
My thoughts are that, the "Ban all the guns" group is wishful thinking.
I've never heard that argument.
The argument is about gun regulation. Just like how in the UK, Australia, Japan etc you can still buy weapons, they just have stricter controls to ensure only enthusiasts and individuals with sound reputation, willing to put some effort in, can get them.
By regulating dangerous things, you reduce their use, and harm reduction is the goal.
Of all the causes of death, being shot is pretty low on the list. You could probably save more lives by make driving a little bit safer.
And there are organisations trying to do exactly that. Just like there are organisations trying to prevent drownings, and falling off ladders. Why should gun-use get any less attention?
It should be a felony to leave a weapon unsecured and unsupervised. If a child acquires a weapon from you and uses it to harm himself or commit a crime you should be charged with a felony.
That's sounds like a form of gun regulation. Socialist!!!!
If someone requires special instruction in order to realize that firearms must never be stored where a toddler can play with them, then that person is an unfit parent. This isn't a firearms issue. If an unfit parent allows small children to play near busy traffic and the child gets run over, you don't see people calling for a ban on automobiles.
Um actually you do. In fact that's exact the reason why the automobile is one of the most heavily regulated inventions in existence.
You see, that's how life works, dangerous things get regulated. It is only in the US, and only in the stupidest parts of the US that people seem to love guns more than common sense.
If it was a technology problem then the problem would affect everyone universally. Since it only affects one country, the same one with the stupidest laws about gun ownership, then we can conclude it is purely a political problem.
, but there are already tons of laws on the books at the state level that say that gun owners need to keep their guns locked up and away from children.
But isn't that a form of gun control? Socialist!!!
Can you forgive a convicted child molester who has supposedly paid their debt to society?
No, because sexuality isn't a choice, and as everyone of us who has a penis knows, when we like something, we will chase it to the ends of the earth and do almost anything to get it.
I don't blame pedos for their predicament, since they can't really help it. But that trait is incompatible with civilised society, and any action against it must be effective for their entire lifetime.
Privacy is not a fixed thing. There are shades of privacy...
This is what shits me about privacy legislation, it is too black and white (either private in your home behind the curtains, or it public - hey you're on public property I have the right to record you and publish whatever you are doing to millions of eyes and ears). Actually even private is no longer private apparently.
Where is the granularity? I'd like to see some sort of localised expectation of privacy, eg if I walk down the street in my undies, I don't care if the neighbours see me, but does that give someone the right to put on TV? If I have a picnic in the public park with my mistress, should that be allowed to be put on TV?
It seems that the notion that you are in public doesn't appreciate that public in your local area is not the same as public globally.
Good point, however I would assume the build of something like this would go:
1. Site work
2. Services (electrical/plumbing etc)
3. Structural assembly
4. Roads, gates, locks on doors, security etc
5. Internals, fittings, sensitive stuff
The press/competition would only be interested in step 5, which is why you get your security in at step 4 to mitigate this risk.
You are aware that the average yearly income in 2012 in China is...
Apple has sold 13 Million iPhone6's in China. Clearly Apple and Pepsi know something you don't.
Yes but you would think that if Pepsi wants to sell a lot of these phones, they would target the median income, not the upper income market.
How much is a lot? Based on the numbers above they could be targeting sales of 10 million units and piss it in easily.
Yes just like there's a market for $1 million dollar Ferraris in the US, but that market is not the average person in the US.
Where does it say Pepsi are targeting only people on exactly the average wage?
People often make the mistake of using averages when dealing with the Chinese. Take away the bottom 1 billion people, and you have a market nearly the same size and wealth of the US. Why wouldn't any business want to tap into that?
Do you think that the Creole people, the Cajuns, and others should have more of their own state, to be more along the lines of the nation state model?
I don't really know the situation that well, but having visited a lot of American states, while disparate in some areas, I never got the impression anyone really wants independence from the Union.
See the Catalans and Basque in Spain for contrasting examples.
Would you just assume that your technology is going to be foolproof and work 100% of the time, and not bother to write down the plate number when the car is right in front of you?
I'm not arguing against also writing the plate down, I'm arguing that any decently secure facility won't just have mom and pop security cameras and high angles that can't read a car plate. Maybe the security is a bit more Mickey Mouse in that neck of the woods, but here, most carpark buildings have plate recognition cameras, surely Elon can afford some?
Slashdot Mirror
I'm an MS user, and just switched to Linux for my web/email machine. I found Mint to easy to use, although not as smooth as Windows. Ubuntu was ok, but their fascination with brown themes never caught my interest. Others like Red Hat, Debian, Suse etc seem more focused towards server/nerd end of the market, so Mint it is for now.
From what I've been reading, it doesn't matter if you turn off Automatic Updates or not, it still goes right ahead and downloads and attempts to install itself.. just like any other malware.
I've been a bit of a MS supporter (check my post history), and brushed off most of the criticism around the MS-hate. However the tracking behaviour of Win10 has crossed the line. I've just upgraded my Win7 laptop to Linux Mint (I still find it clunky, but does the job for web/email). I can no longer support a company that disregards its customer's privacy so blatantly.
Ever heard of celibacy?
I've heard of people pretending to be celibate. Like Catholic ministers, who somehow also seem to be the largest segment of the community into kiddie sex. See any pattern there?
And I will reiterate that I am not saying we shouldn't try to reduce gun violence. I'm not a "gun rights person". I don't own a gun. I am a person who doesn't like to see public policy being guided by emotion rather than reason.
I think the elephant in the room is that the US, being a modern western democracy, is compared to other modern western democracies, and the glaring difference between them is the third world gun violence rate. So logically, some people would like to try and fix that.
Second on the list is probably the road deaths, because that also stands out as way above everyone else. It seems your love for the concept of freedom (not actual freedom, because it's hard to be free if you are dead) far outweighs common sense (ie attitudes to seatbelts, helmets, and guns).
You must hang out with different people than I do. Most men I've met, once you break down the wall of political correctness and manners that society seem to shackle us all with, share similar views about pussy. We all love it, and would do anything to get more of it. In having a connection to the sex industry (legal where I live), the biggest market is men around 35-55, because they tend to ignore social stereotypes and listen to their bodies instead.
My gay friends share similar views about dick or ass, although society doesn't have the same expectation of them to behave a certain way, so they are a lot more open about.
I'm not aware of any pedos in my circle, but can only assume they have the same needs and desires about their sexual bent, which none of us have much control over.
Probably also worth noting I met a guy once who I thought was gay, but he claimed to be asexual. He said he had no sexual desires for either men or women, he was just stuck in neutral. That's the thing with biology, it runs the full spectrum, but you have no say in it.
You do know what the term "burner" phone means, right?
The term burner was added by the incompetent editors of this site, not Pepsi.
If you are going to sell a phone in China, do you want to sell to less than 1% of the population based on your numbers or to the average person?
1% is 13 million units. Even Apple would be happy with that....
We are talking about the soft-drink maker Pepsi, right? I wasn't not aware that Pepsi became a luxury brand in any market.
The same people who can afford Pepsi regularly can also afford a Pepsi phone. Do you get that now?
Again, the initial point was that at $210, this phone would be a "burner" phone.
By a lame Slashdot editor, not Pepsi. Your critical thinking skills need some improvement.
Second, we need programs that regularly send out so much fake data that this tracking is rendered useless.
I agree. Most of us work in IT so know the horror that awaits us as we go down this path, but Joe Sixpack just doesn't seem to care. I can now understand how the switched-on people in Germany must've felt while they watched their countrymen support a psychopath who sold the dream, but instead delivered misery and death.
We may not suffer quite as bad a fate, but I can't see any scenario in which this is a net win for the public as a whole.
Every year, thousands of children are hurt and dozens are killed because a driver, usually a parent, backing up didn't see them.
And we have regulations to try and control this, so why not apply the same logic to guns? Or is your solution that if we simply removed all road rules, enforced a constitutional right to drive automobiles, there'd be no more deaths on the road?
Say no to Automobile regulations!!!
So, I find that there are generally two arguments:
--You can't take my guns
--Ban all the guns
My thoughts are that, the "Ban all the guns" group is wishful thinking.
I've never heard that argument.
The argument is about gun regulation. Just like how in the UK, Australia, Japan etc you can still buy weapons, they just have stricter controls to ensure only enthusiasts and individuals with sound reputation, willing to put some effort in, can get them.
By regulating dangerous things, you reduce their use, and harm reduction is the goal.
Of all the causes of death, being shot is pretty low on the list. You could probably save more lives by make driving a little bit safer.
And there are organisations trying to do exactly that. Just like there are organisations trying to prevent drownings, and falling off ladders. Why should gun-use get any less attention?
It should be a felony to leave a weapon unsecured and unsupervised. If a child acquires a weapon from you and uses it to harm himself or commit a crime you should be charged with a felony.
That's sounds like a form of gun regulation. Socialist!!!!
Is anybody calling for medication or alcohol control?
Um yes, all the time. Just because you are blind to the fact that everything else dangerous is regulated, doesn't mean it ain't so.
If someone requires special instruction in order to realize that firearms must never be stored where a toddler can play with them, then that person is an unfit parent. This isn't a firearms issue. If an unfit parent allows small children to play near busy traffic and the child gets run over, you don't see people calling for a ban on automobiles.
Um actually you do. In fact that's exact the reason why the automobile is one of the most heavily regulated inventions in existence.
You see, that's how life works, dangerous things get regulated. It is only in the US, and only in the stupidest parts of the US that people seem to love guns more than common sense.
By associating toddlers with gun shootings they're making an emotional argument against gun ownership.
Fucking toddlers, how dare they use guns and distort the debate...
It's a technology problem because...
If it was a technology problem then the problem would affect everyone universally. Since it only affects one country, the same one with the stupidest laws about gun ownership, then we can conclude it is purely a political problem.
, but there are already tons of laws on the books at the state level that say that gun owners need to keep their guns locked up and away from children.
But isn't that a form of gun control? Socialist!!!
Can you forgive a convicted child molester who has supposedly paid their debt to society?
No, because sexuality isn't a choice, and as everyone of us who has a penis knows, when we like something, we will chase it to the ends of the earth and do almost anything to get it.
I don't blame pedos for their predicament, since they can't really help it. But that trait is incompatible with civilised society, and any action against it must be effective for their entire lifetime.
Privacy is not a fixed thing. There are shades of privacy...
This is what shits me about privacy legislation, it is too black and white (either private in your home behind the curtains, or it public - hey you're on public property I have the right to record you and publish whatever you are doing to millions of eyes and ears). Actually even private is no longer private apparently.
Where is the granularity? I'd like to see some sort of localised expectation of privacy, eg if I walk down the street in my undies, I don't care if the neighbours see me, but does that give someone the right to put on TV? If I have a picnic in the public park with my mistress, should that be allowed to be put on TV?
It seems that the notion that you are in public doesn't appreciate that public in your local area is not the same as public globally.
So the cop thinks the person is pulling a weapon and in that circumstance they will use lethal force.
And here in lies the problem. Why do cops think this? What situation has brought about this mentality?
Good point, however I would assume the build of something like this would go:
1. Site work
2. Services (electrical/plumbing etc)
3. Structural assembly
4. Roads, gates, locks on doors, security etc
5. Internals, fittings, sensitive stuff
The press/competition would only be interested in step 5, which is why you get your security in at step 4 to mitigate this risk.
You are aware that the average yearly income in 2012 in China is...
Apple has sold 13 Million iPhone6's in China. Clearly Apple and Pepsi know something you don't.
Yes but you would think that if Pepsi wants to sell a lot of these phones, they would target the median income, not the upper income market.
How much is a lot? Based on the numbers above they could be targeting sales of 10 million units and piss it in easily.
Yes just like there's a market for $1 million dollar Ferraris in the US, but that market is not the average person in the US.
Where does it say Pepsi are targeting only people on exactly the average wage?
People often make the mistake of using averages when dealing with the Chinese. Take away the bottom 1 billion people, and you have a market nearly the same size and wealth of the US. Why wouldn't any business want to tap into that?
Do you think that the Creole people, the Cajuns, and others should have more of their own state, to be more along the lines of the nation state model?
I don't really know the situation that well, but having visited a lot of American states, while disparate in some areas, I never got the impression anyone really wants independence from the Union.
See the Catalans and Basque in Spain for contrasting examples.
Would you just assume that your technology is going to be foolproof and work 100% of the time, and not bother to write down the plate number when the car is right in front of you?
I'm not arguing against also writing the plate down, I'm arguing that any decently secure facility won't just have mom and pop security cameras and high angles that can't read a car plate. Maybe the security is a bit more Mickey Mouse in that neck of the woods, but here, most carpark buildings have plate recognition cameras, surely Elon can afford some?
Yeah and in case you hadn't noticed, machines are fucking useless at this same task.
Intelligent for them, not so much for the British taxpayer.