I have a TV, but I sure as shit don't watch 4.5 hours a day. When I do watch something it's usually a movie, maybe ~90 minutes or so, maybe once or twice a month on average. I just have other things I'd rather do. If other people want to watch TV all day long, more power to them, I have no problem with it.
I am curious though, who are these people who are glued to their TVs??
Needing to swap in a second battery in the middle of the day isn't the issue. The problem is that batteries lose their capacity after a year or two.
Bingo, this is exactly why I want a replaceable battery. I tend to keep my phones for several years and being able to swap the battery out once it's degraded is extremely useful.
False positives would be bad if there were no checks, but nowhere does this article say that people are being put in jail because some software says they are a bad guy based on a driver's license picture.
And nowhere did I say they were doing that. Maybe next time you could spend a moment reading what I wrote before replying.
My old smartphone with removable battery and SD card is working just fine still. Going to see how many more years this continues for.
Ditto. I have a plain-Jane Samsung Rugby Pro and I'll use it until it dies. No apps, no crap, just a phone with modest capability. I'd remove all the junk it shipped with if I could.
Hmmm, maybe I should buy another one before it dies because by then any phone I buy will probably be tied to some "watchful eye" corporation like Google.
Sahih Muslim Book 008, Number 3310: 'A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported: Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) married me when I was six years old, and I was admitted to his house when I was nine years old.
Sahih Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 64 Narrated 'Aisha: that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years (i.e., till his death).
This is very well documented time and time again, are you really claiming it didn't happen?
Too bad fucking little girls wasn't banned. When your prophet is a pedophile, you are corrupt from the start.
Bingo. Mohamed raped a 6-year old, then married her when she was 9, but you rarely hear followers of Islam say anything about that, much less denounce it.
Maybe it's just me, but I'd guess that guys who are buying hookers off the internet probably aren't all that involved in international politics.
In other words, they couldn't care less and Joe Hacker has been wasting his time preaching to an audience that's completely uncaring.
I mean, how many guys who see his defacement are going to jump up and go, "Damn, I was gonna book a date with Trixie Tightbottom tonight, but instead I think I'll go protest at the Israeli Embassy!"
never mind when the scene has to wait for the canned laughter to die down.
Many of the laugh tracks you hear today were recorded in the 40's and 50's, which means that a lot of the people you hear laughing in them are dead now.
It always seems a bit surreal to me to to hear these dead people still laughing.
I found the lack of commercials to be rewarding enough. Take those out and you can already watch "more stuff".
Yeah, that's the primary goal of my life: to be able to "watch more stuff". Going outside is for losers anyway.
After all, if I don't watch everything then I might miss that *awesome* sitcom joke and then my life would be diminished to the point of no return. On the other hand maybe I'll see it in my twittle feed or on my non-existent Facebork page. Maybe someone will post a screen cap to Instacram so I won't miss out. I can only hope...
Well maybe, but you didn't exactly pick a show worth watching in the first place...
Maybe he meant that a shitty show watched at double speed improves the shit vs. time metric, or something. I dunno.
As for me, if something sucks, I don't want to watch it at all, let alone at double speed. But of course I'm out of touch with what the cool kids are up to these days.
You mean if you do fuzzy searches for matches among 412 million records you might get false positives? Shocking.
The bad part comes later, when some of those "matches" might have some other tenuous but invalid connections to other data points that happen through sheer chance to link to whatever crime is being investigated.
Example: If your face coincidentally happens to match on 10 out of 14 of their probable data points or indices, AND you also happen to have (for example) visited the same store as the real perpetrator within a certain time frame (another data point), guess who's going to become elevated to the status of a prime suspect? You, that's who.
And once they get a hit that matches like this, tunnel-vision sets in and they spend the rest of their time "proving" it was you, whether it was or not. And good luck proving it wasn't you- you might be able to do so, but it's gonna cost you. It might end up costing you your home, job, spouse, etc etc, not to mention the contents of your bank account. Defense attorneys aren't cheap.
Once they (mistakenly) decide it's you that committed some crime, enormous resources are brought into play to "prove" your guilt, and good luck standing up to them or coming out unscathed.
I'm all for using technology to solve crimes but "push button proof" often morphs into lazy investigations and miscarriages of justice. But why should the authorities care? It's not going to be them spending years in prison. They'll go home and sleep in their own bed tonight while you're being strip-searched on your way to jail.
Why not make the front of the ATM and especially the card reader section out of clear plastic?
It would stop of lot of this stuff dead in the water because you'd be able to see that something wasn't right (assuming you took 2 seconds to look, anyway).
There's a certain delicious slipperiness to this whole thing. I was tempted to say "irony" (of which there is some present) but the idea of one scammer masquerading as another scammer is actually pretty damn funny.
It's like Bernard Madoff sending out letters pretending to be Frank Abagnale, lol.
Imagine how fast Comcast would sue the living shit out of you if you somehow got into their bank account, grabbed $1,775 from them, and then refused to give it back after admitting that you had no claim to the money..
I think this is one of those theoretical possibilities that could conceivably work under very tightly controlled conditions, but would never actually work in the real world.
Slashdot Mirror
Death to these ransomware pricks.
I have a TV, but I sure as shit don't watch 4.5 hours a day. When I do watch something it's usually a movie, maybe ~90 minutes or so, maybe once or twice a month on average. I just have other things I'd rather do. If other people want to watch TV all day long, more power to them, I have no problem with it.
I am curious though, who are these people who are glued to their TVs??
How can such a tradition be condemned when the Prophet himself practised it?
I don't give a shit who practiced it- fucking a 9-year old girl is wrong by pretty much any standard (except Mohamed's).
And in fact, it was not as common as you pretend it to be. Even back then, fucking a 9-year old would do more than "raise a few eyebrows".
Owning slaves was once common and legal. Was it magically "not wrong" back then, even though it was legal? Of course it was wrong.
Would you let your 6-year old daughter marry a 54-year old man (as long as he promised not to fuck her until she was 9)?
Needing to swap in a second battery in the middle of the day isn't the issue. The problem is that batteries lose their capacity after a year or two.
Bingo, this is exactly why I want a replaceable battery. I tend to keep my phones for several years and being able to swap the battery out once it's degraded is extremely useful.
False positives would be bad if there were no checks, but nowhere does this article say that people are being put in jail because some software says they are a bad guy based on a driver's license picture.
And nowhere did I say they were doing that. Maybe next time you could spend a moment reading what I wrote before replying.
My old smartphone with removable battery and SD card is working just fine still. Going to see how many more years this continues for.
Ditto. I have a plain-Jane Samsung Rugby Pro and I'll use it until it dies. No apps, no crap, just a phone with modest capability. I'd remove all the junk it shipped with if I could.
Hmmm, maybe I should buy another one before it dies because by then any phone I buy will probably be tied to some "watchful eye" corporation like Google.
Introducing the Google SpyPhone, now with 50% more data-mining ability!
We don't just connect you to the world, we paw through everything you do and say and track everywhere you go in order to monetize you better!
Free yourself from the constraints of bothersome privacy with the new Google SpyPhone!
Did you never think why the enemies of Islam at the time didn't rise up against this??
Umm, because doing so would get your head lopped off?
-
In Islam, a person becomes accountable to God and a full adult after puberty.
So what?
Are you claiming that Mohamed didn't marry Aisha at six and consummate the marriage at 9, as it says in the Koran?
http://www.faithfreedom.org/Ar...
Sahih Muslim Book 008, Number 3310:
'A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported: Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) married me when I was six years old, and I was admitted to his house when I was nine years old.
Sahih Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 64
Narrated 'Aisha:
that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years (i.e., till his death).
This is very well documented time and time again, are you really claiming it didn't happen?
Too bad fucking little girls wasn't banned. When your prophet is a pedophile, you are corrupt from the start.
Bingo. Mohamed raped a 6-year old, then married her when she was 9, but you rarely hear followers of Islam say anything about that, much less denounce it.
I have nothing against prostitutes or prostitution, and to spell it out for you, I think prostitution should be completely legal.
In other words, what's your point?
Seriously, slashdot.
Maybe he meant a show with a chick with big, jiggling boobs was more fun watched at double speed.
That's probably what he meant.
As for me, if I want to see a chick with big, jiggling boobs I'll just go to any of the 100,000 porn sites that I have bookmarked.
Maybe it's just me, but I'd guess that guys who are buying hookers off the internet probably aren't all that involved in international politics.
In other words, they couldn't care less and Joe Hacker has been wasting his time preaching to an audience that's completely uncaring.
I mean, how many guys who see his defacement are going to jump up and go, "Damn, I was gonna book a date with Trixie Tightbottom tonight, but instead I think I'll go protest at the Israeli Embassy!"
never mind when the scene has to wait for the canned laughter to die down.
Many of the laugh tracks you hear today were recorded in the 40's and 50's, which means that a lot of the people you hear laughing in them are dead now.
It always seems a bit surreal to me to to hear these dead people still laughing.
I found the lack of commercials to be rewarding enough. Take those out and you can already watch "more stuff".
Yeah, that's the primary goal of my life: to be able to "watch more stuff". Going outside is for losers anyway.
After all, if I don't watch everything then I might miss that *awesome* sitcom joke and then my life would be diminished to the point of no return. On the other hand maybe I'll see it in my twittle feed or on my non-existent Facebork page. Maybe someone will post a screen cap to Instacram so I won't miss out. I can only hope...
Well maybe, but you didn't exactly pick a show worth watching in the first place...
Maybe he meant that a shitty show watched at double speed improves the shit vs. time metric, or something. I dunno.
As for me, if something sucks, I don't want to watch it at all, let alone at double speed. But of course I'm out of touch with what the cool kids are up to these days.
You mean if you do fuzzy searches for matches among 412 million records you might get false positives? Shocking.
The bad part comes later, when some of those "matches" might have some other tenuous but invalid connections to other data points that happen through sheer chance to link to whatever crime is being investigated.
Example: If your face coincidentally happens to match on 10 out of 14 of their probable data points or indices, AND you also happen to have (for example) visited the same store as the real perpetrator within a certain time frame (another data point), guess who's going to become elevated to the status of a prime suspect? You, that's who.
And once they get a hit that matches like this, tunnel-vision sets in and they spend the rest of their time "proving" it was you, whether it was or not. And good luck proving it wasn't you- you might be able to do so, but it's gonna cost you. It might end up costing you your home, job, spouse, etc etc, not to mention the contents of your bank account. Defense attorneys aren't cheap.
Once they (mistakenly) decide it's you that committed some crime, enormous resources are brought into play to "prove" your guilt, and good luck standing up to them or coming out unscathed.
I'm all for using technology to solve crimes but "push button proof" often morphs into lazy investigations and miscarriages of justice. But why should the authorities care? It's not going to be them spending years in prison. They'll go home and sleep in their own bed tonight while you're being strip-searched on your way to jail.
Why not make the front of the ATM and especially the card reader section out of clear plastic?
It would stop of lot of this stuff dead in the water because you'd be able to see that something wasn't right (assuming you took 2 seconds to look, anyway).
Intel is expected to release Apollo Lake (Cherry Trail's successor) in the 2nd half of 2016.
Will that one have the secret extra processor and backdoor that can't be audited too?
Microsoft: The Little Company That Couldn't.
Yay! Just what we needed- more astroturf advertising!
"Because the team had no backups of the crucial data..."
(sigh) Seems like someone at the NASCAR IT department needs adult supervision.
There's a certain delicious slipperiness to this whole thing. I was tempted to say "irony" (of which there is some present) but the idea of one scammer masquerading as another scammer is actually pretty damn funny.
It's like Bernard Madoff sending out letters pretending to be Frank Abagnale, lol.
Imagine how fast Comcast would sue the living shit out of you if you somehow got into their bank account, grabbed $1,775 from them, and then refused to give it back after admitting that you had no claim to the money..
Bingo.
I think this is one of those theoretical possibilities that could conceivably work under very tightly controlled conditions, but would never actually work in the real world.