If they're so intent on finding money in everything, why not start charging people for a version of it?
Seriously. Google is big enough, does enough business, has other things they charge for, why not have converted some of these to a paid service? Sure it sucks going from gratis to not-gratis, but if the alternative is to not have the service at all, then I would think a non-trivial number of people would pay for it. AFAIK, nothing in the law would keep them from continuing to make a product of those now paying for it if the concern of it not bringing in that thread of income on top of being paid.
Half of it reads as if it was made up on the spot and hasn't had any research done to see if people really use it that way, and the other half reads as if it was meant to be part of a counter proposal PowerPoint.
Their examples feel particularly dubious. Someone might use microclimate in their shipping truck or copy a token to assure providence. While I can't say I've been swept up in the blockchain miracle workshop, I do know enough that neither of those things were ever meant to be solved or protected by what blockchains do.
It may be gauche to point it out, but I think Slashdot got bamboozled into putting an advertisement on the front page today.
but how does one think that a product like a shoe should leave the factory in a state where it would need a firmware update? That seems to be the absolute minimum of release conditions because who would ever want to have to be the tech support on that call?!
At least they haven't pulled the plug on it entirely.
AFAIK Alphabet has put the "good" version in universities where the library admin does all the heavy lifting of scanning in books and such. That was part of the suit settlement. The public doesn't get to access researchers have.
If I were the Fine Author, I'd head over to one of the unis that signed up with Google and use it there before declaring any sort of hard result.
But I'm still surprised by the idea that someone purpose built a device that can handle multiple sim cards just so they can blast out mass messages. It's like with spam, I guess. The incredibly low rate of clicks is enough with some people.
How much longer before these sorts of things get the short end of the legal stick for helping people? I can't imagine that the airlines or any industry in general being happy that some third party is helping people cut in on their profit margins.
Possibly. This would be untested waters in as much as how does computer defined responses contribute to an illegal act. Because that's what this is. Everyone knows Youtube takes care of this without human interaction which has already been abused, but not to the point where it's aiding and abetting an illegal act.
And then, what does Youtube have in terms of liability by having a system that is known to be abusable in this manner? It's going to be hard for them to claim they didn't know it could be used like this, after all of the publicity of being abused exactly like this.
Not to mention that the heyday of prank videos has come and gone. The changes to their promotion algo effectively nuked them. What is YT trying to do with this change to their TOS?
The USB-C spec allows for end to end encryption of the audio stream. Forcing it onto phones allows for one of the last analog holes to finally be closed off.
Not that a lot of people copy out the port but it was there for the desperate and knowledgeable.
This seems like it should be easy to defeat. Acting as a portal ought to come with some sort of detectable signature. A few extra ms, routing abnormalities?
There wasn't any analysis of the survey, no commentary about the robustness of the numbers, just a quick blurb from the survey and how the EU Article 13 could be a good thing.
It was actively devoid of meaningful content. How the hell did this make through the queue?
It's likely a "speak no evil, hear no evil" situation. They didn't ask and when someone brought it up, Stardock likely replied that they didn't want to know.
Stardock wanted the brand that was it.
Maybe it's time we started to look at forcibly retiring trademarked brands when the original company goes under or is bought under duress. All this seems to do is to turn brands into trading cards to be traded among companies. That's not good for anyone other than the wealthy who try to hide behind them.
Those were called arcade cabinets. Those games were literally designed to keep you pumping in quarters. That's why they were so hard plus had the garish lights of vegas slot machines.
Now we're looking at more subtle psychological manipulations. Instead of playing on fears of not finishing something you started, they're playing on the fear of missing out, or FOMO. This is part of how their gambling mechanics grab you. Didn't get the one piece of flair you wanted? Just try again, but give me a buck to do so. Didn't get it? Just try again, but give me a buck to do so.
Yes, because it locks you into their DRM scheme. Getting rid of the port is one of the last steps in sealing the analog hole. What better way of distracting you from this fact then by giving you nearly the same functionality without it having the same function as before?
is from changing jobs. Sad but something I've become used to in the last twenty years of working. It started out with getting a minimal cost of living raise one year and then twice that the next. No rhyme. No reason. That job got left by the wayside when they invited me to pursue other opportunities, along with 10% of the rest of the staff that year. It wasn't a layoff. Heavens no. It was Jack Welsh adjustment. Just enough people to keep those still there afraid that they might be next.
It's been the same pattern since then. It was always up and down and up and down. Only real raises when I moved onto another job. I kept asking for more and they kept putting up. Finally got one that felt right. Good management. Good people. Hope to stay here for some time.
Like someone already said above, had they gone after process, ingredients and quantities, and those sort of quantifiable things, they may have done better.
Probably not. What you just described is a recipe. And save for specific versions of them, they cannot be the subject of a copyright claim. At best they get trade secret protection and that's about it.
It really was nothing but a waste of court's time for this to have happened. They were grasping at straws for anything to have happened.
Seems we finally have real world verification for Searle's Chinese Room situation. Thank you researchers for finally proving a conjecture from thirty years ago that you continually and blindly ignored. Some of you even argued against it. And now look at the egg on your face.
As repair encompasses the ability to update out of stock and/or out of date units. Innovation isn't contained to wholly new things but also in repurposing and updating the still functional.
I mean, what nation decides to place a higher value on an arbitrary start time for work than it does at making certain its children are able to attend school?
Oh. Wait. That would be our nation.
It's downright silly to put such demands on people. To tell them simultaneously that they must ensure proper care and education of their children and that they have to be employed while being without recourse or protection of the law should the first priority come in conflict with the second. Only psychopaths demand that sort of thing. And I don't know about the rest of you, I'm not one of those.
One step closer to Snowcrash with constantly flying, close orbit satellites. Wonder how much longer before I can walk around with goggles that show me views from above and behind? Surely becoming a gargoyle isn't that far away.
Those currently in charge of this administration simply do not care about their own rules. Not while they're trying to make sure all of their buddies are as rich as possible.
I can hear the response from the Faux news already: Who cares if a few firemen (Heroes!) lose their lives, that's what they signed up for. Who cares if a few people lose their homes and possessions? Don't they have insurance and shouldn't they have moved to get out of the way of these sorts of disasters?
Slashdot Mirror
If they're so intent on finding money in everything, why not start charging people for a version of it?
Seriously. Google is big enough, does enough business, has other things they charge for, why not have converted some of these to a paid service? Sure it sucks going from gratis to not-gratis, but if the alternative is to not have the service at all, then I would think a non-trivial number of people would pay for it. AFAIK, nothing in the law would keep them from continuing to make a product of those now paying for it if the concern of it not bringing in that thread of income on top of being paid.
Google is weird and has weird priorities.
Half of it reads as if it was made up on the spot and hasn't had any research done to see if people really use it that way, and the other half reads as if it was meant to be part of a counter proposal PowerPoint.
Their examples feel particularly dubious. Someone might use microclimate in their shipping truck or copy a token to assure providence. While I can't say I've been swept up in the blockchain miracle workshop, I do know enough that neither of those things were ever meant to be solved or protected by what blockchains do.
It may be gauche to point it out, but I think Slashdot got bamboozled into putting an advertisement on the front page today.
you won't attract the police?
but how does one think that a product like a shoe should leave the factory in a state where it would need a firmware update? That seems to be the absolute minimum of release conditions because who would ever want to have to be the tech support on that call?!
At least they haven't pulled the plug on it entirely.
AFAIK Alphabet has put the "good" version in universities where the library admin does all the heavy lifting of scanning in books and such. That was part of the suit settlement. The public doesn't get to access researchers have.
If I were the Fine Author, I'd head over to one of the unis that signed up with Google and use it there before declaring any sort of hard result.
But I'm still surprised by the idea that someone purpose built a device that can handle multiple sim cards just so they can blast out mass messages. It's like with spam, I guess. The incredibly low rate of clicks is enough with some people.
How much longer before these sorts of things get the short end of the legal stick for helping people? I can't imagine that the airlines or any industry in general being happy that some third party is helping people cut in on their profit margins.
Possibly. This would be untested waters in as much as how does computer defined responses contribute to an illegal act. Because that's what this is. Everyone knows Youtube takes care of this without human interaction which has already been abused, but not to the point where it's aiding and abetting an illegal act.
And then, what does Youtube have in terms of liability by having a system that is known to be abusable in this manner? It's going to be hard for them to claim they didn't know it could be used like this, after all of the publicity of being abused exactly like this.
Not to mention that the heyday of prank videos has come and gone. The changes to their promotion algo effectively nuked them. What is YT trying to do with this change to their TOS?
The USB-C spec allows for end to end encryption of the audio stream. Forcing it onto phones allows for one of the last analog holes to finally be closed off.
Not that a lot of people copy out the port but it was there for the desperate and knowledgeable.
Create one!
This seems like it should be easy to defeat. Acting as a portal ought to come with some sort of detectable signature. A few extra ms, routing abnormalities?
There wasn't any analysis of the survey, no commentary about the robustness of the numbers, just a quick blurb from the survey and how the EU Article 13 could be a good thing.
It was actively devoid of meaningful content. How the hell did this make through the queue?
It's likely a "speak no evil, hear no evil" situation. They didn't ask and when someone brought it up, Stardock likely replied that they didn't want to know.
Stardock wanted the brand that was it.
Maybe it's time we started to look at forcibly retiring trademarked brands when the original company goes under or is bought under duress. All this seems to do is to turn brands into trading cards to be traded among companies. That's not good for anyone other than the wealthy who try to hide behind them.
Those were called arcade cabinets. Those games were literally designed to keep you pumping in quarters. That's why they were so hard plus had the garish lights of vegas slot machines.
Now we're looking at more subtle psychological manipulations. Instead of playing on fears of not finishing something you started, they're playing on the fear of missing out, or FOMO. This is part of how their gambling mechanics grab you. Didn't get the one piece of flair you wanted? Just try again, but give me a buck to do so. Didn't get it? Just try again, but give me a buck to do so.
Yes, because it locks you into their DRM scheme. Getting rid of the port is one of the last steps in sealing the analog hole. What better way of distracting you from this fact then by giving you nearly the same functionality without it having the same function as before?
is from changing jobs. Sad but something I've become used to in the last twenty years of working. It started out with getting a minimal cost of living raise one year and then twice that the next. No rhyme. No reason. That job got left by the wayside when they invited me to pursue other opportunities, along with 10% of the rest of the staff that year. It wasn't a layoff. Heavens no. It was Jack Welsh adjustment. Just enough people to keep those still there afraid that they might be next.
It's been the same pattern since then. It was always up and down and up and down. Only real raises when I moved onto another job. I kept asking for more and they kept putting up. Finally got one that felt right. Good management. Good people. Hope to stay here for some time.
Moral of the story: be careful what you drown in the bathtub if you value liquid enterprise.
Which is exactly why some want all of us so poor that the only thing we can do is spend what little money we get.
You're sorry you guys got caught, not that you were doing anything wrong. Please go cry me a river somewhere else.
Like someone already said above, had they gone after process, ingredients and quantities, and those sort of quantifiable things, they may have done better.
Probably not. What you just described is a recipe. And save for specific versions of them, they cannot be the subject of a copyright claim. At best they get trade secret protection and that's about it.
It really was nothing but a waste of court's time for this to have happened. They were grasping at straws for anything to have happened.
Seems we finally have real world verification for Searle's Chinese Room situation. Thank you researchers for finally proving a conjecture from thirty years ago that you continually and blindly ignored. Some of you even argued against it. And now look at the egg on your face.
Ha!
He doesn't strike me as being one with thick skin. That'd be Eeyore.
As repair encompasses the ability to update out of stock and/or out of date units. Innovation isn't contained to wholly new things but also in repurposing and updating the still functional.
Silly business paper.
I mean, what nation decides to place a higher value on an arbitrary start time for work than it does at making certain its children are able to attend school?
Oh. Wait. That would be our nation.
It's downright silly to put such demands on people. To tell them simultaneously that they must ensure proper care and education of their children and that they have to be employed while being without recourse or protection of the law should the first priority come in conflict with the second. Only psychopaths demand that sort of thing. And I don't know about the rest of you, I'm not one of those.
One step closer to Snowcrash with constantly flying, close orbit satellites. Wonder how much longer before I can walk around with goggles that show me views from above and behind? Surely becoming a gargoyle isn't that far away.
Those currently in charge of this administration simply do not care about their own rules. Not while they're trying to make sure all of their buddies are as rich as possible.
I can hear the response from the Faux news already: Who cares if a few firemen (Heroes!) lose their lives, that's what they signed up for. Who cares if a few people lose their homes and possessions? Don't they have insurance and shouldn't they have moved to get out of the way of these sorts of disasters?