Note I'm not defending these decisions; there are problems with the current system, but there were other problems when the federal government was weaker.
Much of the advance of jurisprudence has been the protection of the individual in the 20th Century. This happened at the same time as the Federal government was gaining strength - the two are correlated, but if anything the Federal government has been acting to demote the status of the individual (e.g. the 16th and 18th Amendments).
If you don't like this shift, then make a good and convincing argument to have it reversed by a Constitutional amendment that restores what you consider the original intent.
That's a losing battle, for a losing cause, unfortunately. I'm focusing my efforts at the State level to interdict and nullify and prepare for the collapse of the big central government.
It sounds like you think you have a business owner - contractor relationship, but you're actually getting a (platonic) housewife - shelf stocker relationship.
Yet I bet you never got up in anybody's face trying to sell them canned squid, or prattled on about the exquisite black ink it was packed in.
I might actually go to Best Buy if they just had shelf stockers!
Here it is: give it to Space-X. They need to prove their mettle at high altitudes and storing the satellite is costing money.
Charge whatever an IMAX-3D movie costs at the time for 15 seconds of satellite time (manage the details ahead of time in a queue set up on a website). Give the JPEG as a novelty birthday gift, merchandise the pictures with Zazzle, etc.
Space-X and NASA can split the revenue. Break-even in about 3-5 years, depending on how big a team is needed to manage ops and business.
A closer example would be a third world country like Vermont where very few people have fast internet connections.
Apple doesn't want you as a customer. The PC and Mac are obsolete, they're moving their customers into the cloud, or so the Steve said. If you don't have fast Internet you're going to bitterly cling on to your personal computers.
As soon as Lion hits the streets I need to shut off my wife's Mac Mini's Internet access - no Snow Leopard or Lion for it, so no security updates. She just got an Acer laptop last week with Fedora and KDE set up to resemble OSX a bit and she's having no trouble adapting (and she's not Slashdot material).
It's been proven in study after study that this sort of password cycling makes for lower security (as you've shown). Your security people should be fired (or at least hit with a clue bat).
millions of gallons of acid and other toxic chemicals
Maybe they plan to put that back where they took the mud out - China just dumps it into pools around the factory and the whole district is barely inhabitable. Not dealing with a jurisdictional environmental agency in the first world would help with the price effectiveness.
The laws that we have make it hard to compete by virtue of screwing over your customers (more than is usual, anyway). As you note, PayPal is a shining example of that.
The laws cheerfully allow PayPal to screw over its customers - are you unaware? Meanwhile, it's nearly impossible to compete with PayPal. Therefore, PayPal will continue to screw over its customers whenever it feels like it, safe in the knowledge that the government is protecting its business model.
The law isn't mathematics. Contracts are interpreted by courts and that is clearly not a reasonable interpretation.
The US Supreme Court found that growing food on your own land to feed your own family is 'Interstate Commerce'. I wouldn't rely on reasonable interpretations by a court to save you.
I wouldn't be surprised if someday we were to find out that Google is monitoring/recording/using everything going through their DNS
Of course they are, is there any reason to think otherwise? Just like Google Voice helps them train their voice recognizer - they provide a service that's mutually beneficial.
Don't use Google DNS for a mail server, though, if you use any DNS-based RBL's. If your ISP's DNS is unreliable go straight to the roots with a caching resolver.
One day their profits don't cover their expenses, so they decide that to continue to run the service they need to sell [insert any profit-making use of data stored on the service].
It's still the same end-result - they need to come up with better language if they mean something different.
Which, of course, means that the tinfoil hat wearers can stop thinking that this will be useful as some sort of government tracking tool.
I don't think tinfoil hats are going to be very useful here. Now, a shag carpet hat or a loaded rubber hat might change the resonant frequency of the room enough to be useful.
The part you're missing is that they only got big enough because government regulations (which always favor the incumbent) prevent them from having meaningful competition.
Go ahead, try to start a competing payment processor and see how well you do. Look into PayPal's history if you doubt this.
Visa and Mastercard are payment processors, it's not their place to decide where one can and can't buy things
I'll bet somebody a two ounce of silver donation to Wikileaks that if this is adjudicated we'll see that Visa/Mastercard were directed by the government to block transfers to Wikileaks.
It's not by accident that sufficient regulatory hurdles exist to starting a payment processing company that there are only a few which can be easily controlled. Government-regulated "free" markets are first and foremost designed to work well for those governments. 2nd Amendment supporters understand why this is true for personal freedoms, but even some of them support infringement of economic liberties.
Perhaps this is the point of the lawsuit - to expose the blacklisting in court.
Looks like Carnegie switched to a corporate structure after 16 years - so, what, Windows 3.1 in geekspeak.
But the drug cartels and kingdoms achieve what governments achieve by the same methods - threats of violence. Corporations do their violence by proxy via the government. People can't really defend themselves thoroughly as the governments claim a monopoly on violence in the current system.
If car companies were not forced to use an standard set of test to find how safe are they cars, all cars would advertise as "the safest car ever".
You make my point - the rating that people go by is the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety rating, a lab formed as a cooperative among insurance companies.
Your suggestion sounded reasonable but it doubled the part count.
I assumed he was integrating the calibration into the PHY and only replacing the calibrating chip with a memory chip in the cable - should be a cheaper part. Ought to be in Version 2 of the spec, I'd imagine.
America's media masters have a very fucking twisted sense of what's "acceptable" and what's not.
They just know what the government will permit. To answer TFS's question, it's because the Unites States is now a warfare State. The compelling State interest is to have lots of young men ready to kill when ordered to do so.
Truth be told, they could also use more procreation to help fund their Ponzi schemes, but at this point it's too late for that.
respond with a laundry list of their strong financials. That response completely misses the point.
Short term, this open letter is to the shareholders and their board (nobody else can fire the CEO(s)), which care usually only about current earnings.
That said, this guy is worried about long-term performance which the shareholders ought to care about, but the stock market isn't structured to care. The bond market, more so.
Slashdot Mirror
We can basically say renewable energy fsckin works, now ?
Of course it works. The open question is, "can it scale?"
Good luck tripling the amount of hydro or getting woodstoves into cities.
Note I'm not defending these decisions; there are problems with the current system, but there were other problems when the federal government was weaker.
Much of the advance of jurisprudence has been the protection of the individual in the 20th Century. This happened at the same time as the Federal government was gaining strength - the two are correlated, but if anything the Federal government has been acting to demote the status of the individual (e.g. the 16th and 18th Amendments).
If you don't like this shift, then make a good and convincing argument to have it reversed by a Constitutional amendment that restores what you consider the original intent.
That's a losing battle, for a losing cause, unfortunately. I'm focusing my efforts at the State level to interdict and nullify and prepare for the collapse of the big central government.
But less than a gram of gold plating doesn't add much to the cost of a cable.
A gram of gold is worth about $48 today. I doubt a $4 cable has much gold. Not that you need it, just sayin'.
It sounds like you think you have a business owner - contractor relationship, but you're actually getting a (platonic) housewife - shelf stocker relationship.
Yet I bet you never got up in anybody's face trying to sell them canned squid, or prattled on about the exquisite black ink it was packed in.
I might actually go to Best Buy if they just had shelf stockers!
because no one has a launch plan.
Here it is: give it to Space-X. They need to prove their mettle at high altitudes and storing the satellite is costing money.
Charge whatever an IMAX-3D movie costs at the time for 15 seconds of satellite time (manage the details ahead of time in a queue set up on a website). Give the JPEG as a novelty birthday gift, merchandise the pictures with Zazzle, etc.
Space-X and NASA can split the revenue. Break-even in about 3-5 years, depending on how big a team is needed to manage ops and business.
Nothing to see here folks, invest your money in corporate stocks in 401(k)'s. It'll always have value.
You mean Wickard v. Filburn? That wasn't to "feed his family", it was to run his farm.
Ah, thanks for the correction. Either way, it was wheat that never left the farm.
There was no vague language involved and the court's reasoning was valid and easy to follow, even if one disagrees with it.
It's valid only so far as the rational-basis test is valid, which is completely antithetical to the founding precepts of the United States.
A closer example would be a third world country like Vermont where very few people have fast internet connections.
Apple doesn't want you as a customer. The PC and Mac are obsolete, they're moving their customers into the cloud, or so the Steve said. If you don't have fast Internet you're going to bitterly cling on to your personal computers.
As soon as Lion hits the streets I need to shut off my wife's Mac Mini's Internet access - no Snow Leopard or Lion for it, so no security updates. She just got an Acer laptop last week with Fedora and KDE set up to resemble OSX a bit and she's having no trouble adapting (and she's not Slashdot material).
It's been proven in study after study that this sort of password cycling makes for lower security (as you've shown). Your security people should be fired (or at least hit with a clue bat).
millions of gallons of acid and other toxic chemicals
Maybe they plan to put that back where they took the mud out - China just dumps it into pools around the factory and the whole district is barely inhabitable. Not dealing with a jurisdictional environmental agency in the first world would help with the price effectiveness.
The laws that we have make it hard to compete by virtue of screwing over your customers (more than is usual, anyway). As you note, PayPal is a shining example of that.
The laws cheerfully allow PayPal to screw over its customers - are you unaware? Meanwhile, it's nearly impossible to compete with PayPal. Therefore, PayPal will continue to screw over its customers whenever it feels like it, safe in the knowledge that the government is protecting its business model.
The law isn't mathematics. Contracts are interpreted by courts and that is clearly not a reasonable interpretation.
The US Supreme Court found that growing food on your own land to feed your own family is 'Interstate Commerce'. I wouldn't rely on reasonable interpretations by a court to save you.
I wouldn't be surprised if someday we were to find out that Google is monitoring/recording/using everything going through their DNS
Of course they are, is there any reason to think otherwise? Just like Google Voice helps them train their voice recognizer - they provide a service that's mutually beneficial.
Don't use Google DNS for a mail server, though, if you use any DNS-based RBL's. If your ISP's DNS is unreliable go straight to the roots with a caching resolver.
DNS should not be messed with. It's a foundation of the network. The host-RFC says so.
DNS should be messed with. It's the Law. The men with guns say so.
Welcome to Earth, now almost totally controlled by violent regimes.
well, the service requires a certain profit level to maintain operation. hence. profit is necessary for the service.
Not even profit - just covering expenses. Assuming they don't mean this, they can figure out better language.
"whatever us necessary to provide the service"
One day their profits don't cover their expenses, so they decide that to continue to run the service they need to sell [insert any profit-making use of data stored on the service].
It's still the same end-result - they need to come up with better language if they mean something different.
Which, of course, means that the tinfoil hat wearers can stop thinking that this will be useful as some sort of government tracking tool.
I don't think tinfoil hats are going to be very useful here. Now, a shag carpet hat or a loaded rubber hat might change the resonant frequency of the room enough to be useful.
The part you're missing is that they only got big enough because government regulations (which always favor the incumbent) prevent them from having meaningful competition.
Go ahead, try to start a competing payment processor and see how well you do. Look into PayPal's history if you doubt this.
Visa and Mastercard are payment processors, it's not their place to decide where one can and can't buy things
I'll bet somebody a two ounce of silver donation to Wikileaks that if this is adjudicated we'll see that Visa/Mastercard were directed by the government to block transfers to Wikileaks.
It's not by accident that sufficient regulatory hurdles exist to starting a payment processing company that there are only a few which can be easily controlled. Government-regulated "free" markets are first and foremost designed to work well for those governments. 2nd Amendment supporters understand why this is true for personal freedoms, but even some of them support infringement of economic liberties.
Perhaps this is the point of the lawsuit - to expose the blacklisting in court.
Looks like Carnegie switched to a corporate structure after 16 years - so, what, Windows 3.1 in geekspeak.
But the drug cartels and kingdoms achieve what governments achieve by the same methods - threats of violence. Corporations do their violence by proxy via the government. People can't really defend themselves thoroughly as the governments claim a monopoly on violence in the current system.
If car companies were not forced to use an standard set of test to find how safe are they cars, all cars would advertise as "the safest car ever".
You make my point - the rating that people go by is the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety rating, a lab formed as a cooperative among insurance companies.
riaa is a terrorist org.
Hey, but Anonymous is working actively to aid the "Food Terrorists" in Orlando.
Your suggestion sounded reasonable but it doubled the part count.
I assumed he was integrating the calibration into the PHY and only replacing the calibrating chip with a memory chip in the cable - should be a cheaper part. Ought to be in Version 2 of the spec, I'd imagine.
America's media masters have a very fucking twisted sense of what's "acceptable" and what's not.
They just know what the government will permit. To answer TFS's question, it's because the Unites States is now a warfare State. The compelling State interest is to have lots of young men ready to kill when ordered to do so.
Truth be told, they could also use more procreation to help fund their Ponzi schemes, but at this point it's too late for that.
respond with a laundry list of their strong financials. That response completely misses the point.
Short term, this open letter is to the shareholders and their board (nobody else can fire the CEO(s)), which care usually only about current earnings.
That said, this guy is worried about long-term performance which the shareholders ought to care about, but the stock market isn't structured to care. The bond market, more so.