why shouldn't customers have this right? Shouldn't all this be mentioned in the T&Cs anyway?
"We reserve the right to use your information however we want. Press Agree to acknowledge you accept this and to start using our wonderful service".
It is not reasonable to expect the average Google user to understand what even that admittedly plain statement actually means, mostly because depth and breadth of what constitutes "...your information..." is far from plain, if not deliberately hidden.
Ermmm... no. Not quite. If Google wants to keep all that information, fine, but they need to be open about it. No, hiding the truth in 90 pages of ToS documents written in legalese is not, by an stretch, "open". Then and only then can consumers make an informed decision about whether or not to use Google's services.
...is a trip through some animal's gut? I think we've discovered a new industry for the labor forces in "emerging nations". Not suprisingly, it's the raw material "production" positions that will be highly prized, whereas the refining and packaging jobs, not so much.
It If you host your own, even with power, cooling and hardware, the payback time is about 4 to 6 months.
That depends a great deal on the scale and availability demands placed upon your infrastructure. One can deploy a "private cloud" on one or two cast-off PC's, but that will be little more than a toy. If you want to support a serious deployment (dozens or hundreds of nodes) with anything approaching usable performance, you're going to be investing in some serious network and shared storage hardware, not to mention host servers. Want HA? Still more (bigger) bucks. Still, it doesn't take much to make those investments pay. I just think that 4-6 months is a bit too optimistic in all but the most trivial installations. YMMV, of course, but 12-36 months is more like it.
Gosh, perhaps I was a bit too hard on your corporate powers. They seem to be putting forth a sound effort to advance their own interests and to distract voters with BS issues. My apologies.
BTW, any thinking person knows that gay marriage is an important issue. It's just that the rest of the voters seem to think that it's important for all the wrong reasons.
You guys need to get your government under control. Get with your boards of directors and insist on a proper budget for buying "compliant" government officials. I, know, it's painful sometimes, but it's the price of doing business. They payoff is that we can do just about anything we want and with a little more money thrown at the right political campaigns, and the stupid voters will stay focused on stupid shit like gay marriage and leave us alone. So get it done. We can't have the people thinking that they actually control things. Not now.
Very aptly explained. This is why Bitcoin is nothing like a commodity, where external conditions can and do influence the availability/supply and thereby, the price. No such conditions exist, at least none with any significant impact on the cost of producing the commodity. Given that, Bitcoin looks a hell of a lot more like a pyramid scheme than a commodity. Those who "got in at the bottom", when the cost of mining was a very small fraction of the value produced, made out like, well... like bandits. By design, the Bitcoin "system" will never see a period like that again. The only thing that changes then, is the demand, and good lucking forecasting that one, suckers.
This behavior not going away until it becomes to expensive, in terms of bad PR as well as fines, for dishonest practices. You either honor your customers' request/expectation of privacy or you don't. If you don't it should cost you. Currently it simply doesn't, so the so-called free market being what it is, we see rampant abuse like this. Mind you, the clueless legions who so blithely bend over to have their privacy raped by Facebook et al deserve a fair share of the blame here, but it is not realistic to expect most of them to fully understand just how bad an idea it is to let some of these go on. For that reason, regulation is in order, and I mean real regulation, with teeth and a budget to enforce it. I will not hold my breath.
Touche'. I was was waiting for someone to take the "erect" tangent.
Warning: the following text includes crude racial stereotypes, which we normally wouldn't stoop to, but Kim is such a douchebag, we'll make an exception. Oh, and apologies to Team America too.
"Ooo, rook at my rarge erect missre, eveybody. Rook and be afraid. Trembre at the though of it penetrating your airspace and viorating your fertire plains, over and over. Now give us food and money."
Nice, but I never boot my machine, it reboots only automatically when I'm in bed and updates are done.
It's like buying a Ferrari, something that's OK in theory but you can never really get any real use out of it.
I beg to differ. The Ferrari (or any exotic foreign sports car) can attract women, usually without even turning a wheel. A PC (even with that SSD), not so much. Oh, and (obligatory) especially if that PC runs Windows 8.
Well, of course they can do more, but how much more? A lot of the OS and application software that runs in my server cabinets is licensed per processor. Seems that the Atom would be a bad fit in that particular scenario.
A factor of 5 does not justify the use of the metaphor "drop in the ocean". I wish people would reserve the use of metaphors for where they belong.
I wish most people weren't functionally illiterate. Then they might understand a big word like "metaphor" and have at least a remote chance of understanding your objection to their misuse. But then deliberately stupid people who dismiss the importance of reducing, wherever possible, carbon emissions, tend to blend in with the the noise for me, so it's easy to overlook their lack of language skills.
Why disconcerting? Let's say I read with a truly unusual level of speed and comprehension. Come exam time, I've spent only a fraction of the "expected" time with my "nose in a book", and yet I ace the test. Repeat. It's not long before I am suspected of cheating. Fuck that and the notion that my instructors need to know how much time I've spent studying. They need to know that I've mastered the material I was assigned. Period.
Nice try, but wrong. The DEA will have nothing to do with you being busted, prosecuted, convicted and sentenced for smoking a joint, and almost certainly not with you selling a joint. A few hundred pounds of product? OK, now you might get their attention. But you are clearly bitching about the nature of drug laws - in general. Let's try to focus on the real problem and not go off on some "they're all Nazi's" rant about the DEA. The DEA is only a part of a much bigger problem. While you're about it, how about actually providing your proof that "...the DEA lies about everything..."?
True, the cheerleading for North Korea and China on Slashdot is almost embarrassing.
Absent, but embarrassing.
I have to wonder at the thought processes of somebody who, when you say "Y'know, our support of Operation Condor was really pretty disgusting", somehow hears "I love Communism so much that I'd kiss Uncle Joe right on his death camps! Viva La DPRK!" and begins frothing at the mouth...
Well there's yer problem - you assumed that "thought" was involved. Who needs to think when Fox News and Rush can do it for you?
I doubt even 2% of Slashdot readers have the intellectual capacity to understand the context of these communications. Instead, like the AC above me, they will spout leftist talking points. While at the same time condemning the West for their actions, they are in full support of regimes like North Korea and China, which have inflicted 100 times the deaths and misery than anyone can accuse the West of doing.
[citation needed]
You're awfully quick with statements about those whose mental capacity you so blithely dismiss, but you neglect completely to support your remarkable blanket statements. Probably figured we were to slow to catch that, I guess. Here's a tip, consider it a given that not everyone who disagrees with you is a moron, nor do they all think "the same way". I know that those shades of gray don't resolve well through the lens of Fox News, but at least try to do some thinking for yourself before you come here and demonstrate that you clearly have not.
Bullshit. The internet is not a private network. There is a whole world of difference.
Wrong again. The Internet is a bunch of interconnected networks, some private, some not so much. I manage a VPN that connects my company's private network to one managed for us by a major hosting provider. The mere fact that our networks are so connected does not, in any way shape or form, grant me the right to bang away in an attempt to gain unauthorized access to the resources on their network, nor they ours. Their network is theirs. Mine is mine. To suggest otherwise (again, absent any agreements specifically addressing the matter), is just stupid.
The very fact that the DEA exists is an affront to personal liberty;
Really? How so?
We have decades of detailed records of them spreading falsehoods, destroying families, in general doing far more harm than drugs ever did or ever could.
We do? Where?
Look. I am not apologizing for the failed "war on drugs", but you are making a lot of bold, and as of yet unfounded, assertions about the DEA. That's not exactly contributing to needed rational discourse about the matter. It damn sure isn't proving a thing about collusion between government enforcers and (in this case) Apple. Not that there's much doubt, but let's at least try to not sound so much like Fox News. M'kay?
I hate to have to tell you this, but no.
If they are "connected to the hospital network", then the hospital network's security IS their security, and vice versa. You cannot separate the two, because lax security in one can enable entry into the other..
By your logic, the entire Internet is fair game for the hospital's pen testers. I hate to have to tell you this, but it's not, nor is any specific network interconnected to the hospital's network, absent specific agreements spelling out such terms.
Slashdot Mirror
1. Facebook would like to have a discussion with him.
2. The FBI would like to have a discussion with him.
Sadly, I offer one more thought...
3. Some patent attorney from East Texas would like to have a discussion with him.
why shouldn't customers have this right? Shouldn't all this be mentioned in the T&Cs anyway?
"We reserve the right to use your information however we want. Press Agree to acknowledge you accept this and to start using our wonderful service".
It is not reasonable to expect the average Google user to understand what even that admittedly plain statement actually means, mostly because depth and breadth of what constitutes "...your information..." is far from plain, if not deliberately hidden.
Ermmm... no. Not quite. If Google wants to keep all that information, fine, but they need to be open about it. No, hiding the truth in 90 pages of ToS documents written in legalese is not, by an stretch, "open". Then and only then can consumers make an informed decision about whether or not to use Google's services.
...is a trip through some animal's gut? I think we've discovered a new industry for the labor forces in "emerging nations". Not suprisingly, it's the raw material "production" positions that will be highly prized, whereas the refining and packaging jobs, not so much.
It If you host your own, even with power, cooling and hardware, the payback time is about 4 to 6 months.
That depends a great deal on the scale and availability demands placed upon your infrastructure. One can deploy a "private cloud" on one or two cast-off PC's, but that will be little more than a toy. If you want to support a serious deployment (dozens or hundreds of nodes) with anything approaching usable performance, you're going to be investing in some serious network and shared storage hardware, not to mention host servers. Want HA? Still more (bigger) bucks. Still, it doesn't take much to make those investments pay. I just think that 4-6 months is a bit too optimistic in all but the most trivial installations. YMMV, of course, but 12-36 months is more like it.
Politicians fail to understand technology!
[/breathless-newscaster-voice]
Nothing to see hear. Move along, now...
...to not fail, apparently.
Gosh, perhaps I was a bit too hard on your corporate powers. They seem to be putting forth a sound effort to advance their own interests and to distract voters with BS issues. My apologies.
BTW, any thinking person knows that gay marriage is an important issue. It's just that the rest of the voters seem to think that it's important for all the wrong reasons.
Wasn't that already one of those craptastic SciFi, made-for-TV movies?
You guys need to get your government under control. Get with your boards of directors and insist on a proper budget for buying "compliant" government officials. I, know, it's painful sometimes, but it's the price of doing business. They payoff is that we can do just about anything we want and with a little more money thrown at the right political campaigns, and the stupid voters will stay focused on stupid shit like gay marriage and leave us alone. So get it done. We can't have the people thinking that they actually control things. Not now.
Very aptly explained. This is why Bitcoin is nothing like a commodity, where external conditions can and do influence the availability/supply and thereby, the price. No such conditions exist, at least none with any significant impact on the cost of producing the commodity. Given that, Bitcoin looks a hell of a lot more like a pyramid scheme than a commodity. Those who "got in at the bottom", when the cost of mining was a very small fraction of the value produced, made out like, well... like bandits. By design, the Bitcoin "system" will never see a period like that again. The only thing that changes then, is the demand, and good lucking forecasting that one, suckers.
This behavior not going away until it becomes to expensive, in terms of bad PR as well as fines, for dishonest practices. You either honor your customers' request/expectation of privacy or you don't. If you don't it should cost you. Currently it simply doesn't, so the so-called free market being what it is, we see rampant abuse like this. Mind you, the clueless legions who so blithely bend over to have their privacy raped by Facebook et al deserve a fair share of the blame here, but it is not realistic to expect most of them to fully understand just how bad an idea it is to let some of these go on. For that reason, regulation is in order, and I mean real regulation, with teeth and a budget to enforce it. I will not hold my breath.
Touche'. I was was waiting for someone to take the "erect" tangent.
Warning: the following text includes crude racial stereotypes, which we normally wouldn't stoop to, but Kim is such a douchebag, we'll make an exception. Oh, and apologies to Team America too.
"Ooo, rook at my rarge erect missre, eveybody. Rook and be afraid. Trembre at the though of it penetrating your airspace and viorating your fertire plains, over and over. Now give us food and money."
"It boots in 7seconds rather than 40 seconds. "
Nice, but I never boot my machine, it reboots only automatically when I'm in bed and updates are done. It's like buying a Ferrari, something that's OK in theory but you can never really get any real use out of it.
I beg to differ. The Ferrari (or any exotic foreign sports car) can attract women, usually without even turning a wheel. A PC (even with that SSD), not so much. Oh, and (obligatory) especially if that PC runs Windows 8.
The source to compile your own kernel is 1000x larger than the object code you'll even need. Add to that the full make tools and compilers. Prick!
Whoosh...
Well, of course they can do more, but how much more? A lot of the OS and application software that runs in my server cabinets is licensed per processor. Seems that the Atom would be a bad fit in that particular scenario.
A factor of 5 does not justify the use of the metaphor "drop in the ocean". I wish people would reserve the use of metaphors for where they belong.
I wish most people weren't functionally illiterate. Then they might understand a big word like "metaphor" and have at least a remote chance of understanding your objection to their misuse. But then deliberately stupid people who dismiss the importance of reducing, wherever possible, carbon emissions, tend to blend in with the the noise for me, so it's easy to overlook their lack of language skills.
Why disconcerting? Let's say I read with a truly unusual level of speed and comprehension. Come exam time, I've spent only a fraction of the "expected" time with my "nose in a book", and yet I ace the test. Repeat. It's not long before I am suspected of cheating. Fuck that and the notion that my instructors need to know how much time I've spent studying. They need to know that I've mastered the material I was assigned. Period.
Nice try, but wrong. The DEA will have nothing to do with you being busted, prosecuted, convicted and sentenced for smoking a joint, and almost certainly not with you selling a joint. A few hundred pounds of product? OK, now you might get their attention. But you are clearly bitching about the nature of drug laws - in general. Let's try to focus on the real problem and not go off on some "they're all Nazi's" rant about the DEA. The DEA is only a part of a much bigger problem. While you're about it, how about actually providing your proof that "...the DEA lies about everything..."?
If you aren't recompiling the kernel to include only the things you "really need", you don't deserve to be talking about bloat.
True, the cheerleading for North Korea and China on Slashdot is almost embarrassing.
Absent, but embarrassing.
I have to wonder at the thought processes of somebody who, when you say "Y'know, our support of Operation Condor was really pretty disgusting", somehow hears "I love Communism so much that I'd kiss Uncle Joe right on his death camps! Viva La DPRK!" and begins frothing at the mouth...
Well there's yer problem - you assumed that "thought" was involved. Who needs to think when Fox News and Rush can do it for you?
I doubt even 2% of Slashdot readers have the intellectual capacity to understand the context of these communications. Instead, like the AC above me, they will spout leftist talking points. While at the same time condemning the West for their actions, they are in full support of regimes like North Korea and China, which have inflicted 100 times the deaths and misery than anyone can accuse the West of doing.
[citation needed]
You're awfully quick with statements about those whose mental capacity you so blithely dismiss, but you neglect completely to support your remarkable blanket statements. Probably figured we were to slow to catch that, I guess. Here's a tip, consider it a given that not everyone who disagrees with you is a moron, nor do they all think "the same way". I know that those shades of gray don't resolve well through the lens of Fox News, but at least try to do some thinking for yourself before you come here and demonstrate that you clearly have not.
Bullshit. The internet is not a private network. There is a whole world of difference.
Wrong again. The Internet is a bunch of interconnected networks, some private, some not so much. I manage a VPN that connects my company's private network to one managed for us by a major hosting provider. The mere fact that our networks are so connected does not, in any way shape or form, grant me the right to bang away in an attempt to gain unauthorized access to the resources on their network, nor they ours. Their network is theirs. Mine is mine. To suggest otherwise (again, absent any agreements specifically addressing the matter), is just stupid.
The DEA lies about everything else.
[citation needed]
The very fact that the DEA exists is an affront to personal liberty;
Really? How so?
We have decades of detailed records of them spreading falsehoods, destroying families, in general doing far more harm than drugs ever did or ever could.
We do? Where?
Look. I am not apologizing for the failed "war on drugs", but you are making a lot of bold, and as of yet unfounded, assertions about the DEA. That's not exactly contributing to needed rational discourse about the matter. It damn sure isn't proving a thing about collusion between government enforcers and (in this case) Apple. Not that there's much doubt, but let's at least try to not sound so much like Fox News. M'kay?
ot legal, either."
I hate to have to tell you this, but no. If they are "connected to the hospital network", then the hospital network's security IS their security, and vice versa. You cannot separate the two, because lax security in one can enable entry into the other..
By your logic, the entire Internet is fair game for the hospital's pen testers. I hate to have to tell you this, but it's not, nor is any specific network interconnected to the hospital's network, absent specific agreements spelling out such terms.