In 5 years you may not be able to buy a dumb TV anymore, as manufacturers are shifting away from them. It's rather onerous to buy a dumb TV now, unless you want to order one online and deal with returning the first couple that show up broken. Go to any big box store and look at the big screen display televisions they have hooked up. Almost every one of them is internet enabled and some of them are internet required. As in, if you turn on your TV and it can't phone home to the mother ship, you aren't watching anything today. Not even from your DVD player.
A TV is no longer an appliance that you buy, own, and use as you see fit. Having a TV in your home is quickly becoming a "service" that you must license and rent from a company like Samsung. Of course Samsung won't send you a monthly bill like the cable company does; they'll get their cut through the device itself, with always-on microphones, viewer analysis that would make the Neilsen ratings people cream their pants, unskippable advertising, and constant spying on your household to monetize you. This isn't tinfoil hat stuff, it's been evolving for a few years already.
The masses will accept these Telescreen devices because the price goes down a couple hundred dollars. And the manufacturers will stop making televisions that don't do this shit. Give it a few years and trying to buy a dumb TV that doesn't require internet access will get you blank stares or laughed out of the store like you'd get if you tried to buy a CRT television today. You and I, who want to buy a TV without any of these "features," will be relegated to poking around at garage sales hoping to find one that still works.
It's mostly because of SJWs that the fraud was allowed to continue as long as it did. They wanted so badly for a woman to take the industry by storm that they threw due diligence to the wind. Questioning a woman is misogyny now, and no one dared look behind the curtain lest the poster child for female CEOs be found not wearing any clothes. In the end they lost their own shirts, bit of poetry if you ask me.
The entire lawsuit was a hit piece called out them. It's chilling.
You say this as if the lawsuit was fabricated out of thin air and there was no cause for action. As if you think Thiel sat down one day and say "I know, Hulk! Let's make up something to sue Gawker about!"
Gawker did something illegal. How is it a hit piece to sue them over that? What difference does it make who pays the plaintiff's attorneys? The suit is just as valid no matter who bankrolls it. Gawker brought this entirely on themselves. If Gawker hadn't BROKEN THE LAW, we wouldn't be having this conversation, Thiel or no Thiel.
This isn't you or some private individual or company that's telling Gawker to shut up, this is a judge declaring that Gawker's publication was illegal under US law.
That was not declared by a judge, it was decided by a jury.
Once a criminal serves their time in prison, or more likely are simply released with a caution or ASBO, they are Reformed. They will be good for their entire life, so landlords and the like have no right to know whether their would-be tenant blew up his last two apartments and left meth-lab chemicals saturating the walls to neighboring units.
So your preferred alternative is that once released, this person should be marked for life, and no one will ever rent to them again? You enjoy having a large homeless population in your city, do you?
Am I missing something, or are the folks guiding these companies steering them toward potential big trouble?
Surely "big trouble" is reserved for the guys who don't cooperate with NSA and friends. All of this spying is probably of some marketing value to Microsoft, but I'm thinking the real benefit is a cozy arrangement with big brother.
It doesn't destroy any arguments. Apple can make concessions to the government of China in order to continue doing business there, without volunteering to make the same concessions to the American government. We're supposed to have more rights in the US than they do in China, and people at Apple think those rights are worth fighting for.
The second amendment specifically states the right to bear arms is for use in a militia.
No it doesn't, it uses the necessity of a militia as a reason justify why the people (not "the militia") have the right to bear arms. Take the following hypothetical statement:
"Proper sanitation, being necessary to the preparation of healthy food, the right of the people to wash their hands, shall not be infringed."
Would you interpret that statement to say that only people who prepare food are allowed to wash their hands?
Why does a TV need internet anyway as long as you're not dumb enough to jump on the smart tv bandwagon.
In 5 years you may not be able to buy a dumb TV anymore, as manufacturers are shifting away from them. It's rather onerous to buy a dumb TV now, unless you want to order one online and deal with returning the first couple that show up broken. Go to any big box store and look at the big screen display televisions they have hooked up. Almost every one of them is internet enabled and some of them are internet required. As in, if you turn on your TV and it can't phone home to the mother ship, you aren't watching anything today. Not even from your DVD player.
A TV is no longer an appliance that you buy, own, and use as you see fit. Having a TV in your home is quickly becoming a "service" that you must license and rent from a company like Samsung. Of course Samsung won't send you a monthly bill like the cable company does; they'll get their cut through the device itself, with always-on microphones, viewer analysis that would make the Neilsen ratings people cream their pants, unskippable advertising, and constant spying on your household to monetize you. This isn't tinfoil hat stuff, it's been evolving for a few years already.
The masses will accept these Telescreen devices because the price goes down a couple hundred dollars. And the manufacturers will stop making televisions that don't do this shit. Give it a few years and trying to buy a dumb TV that doesn't require internet access will get you blank stares or laughed out of the store like you'd get if you tried to buy a CRT television today. You and I, who want to buy a TV without any of these "features," will be relegated to poking around at garage sales hoping to find one that still works.
Why can't we have intelligent discourse on this site, instead of this polarizing nonsense?
There is no intelligent discourse when SJWs are involved, as discourse by definition requires that both sides are permitted to engage. Anytime an SJW says it's time to "have a conversation about $TOPIC," what they really mean is they're prepared to lecture you about $TOPIC. If you try to present any opposing viewpoints - you know, your side of the conversation they claimed to be interested in starting - they'll use whatever tools are at their disposal to suppress your opinions. If it's social media, they block you; if it's a discussion forum, they ban you from it; if it's a public venue, they petition to have you disinvited as a speaker. They call this "no-platforming," as it sounds a bit less insidious than "censorship." Once you've been muted from the supposed conversation, that's when the real fun begins. Coordinated harassment that you aren't able to respond to, doxing, attempts to get you fired from your job, in some cases even false criminal charges. All because you dared to disagree with someone on the internet.
No, it's best not to attempt intelligent discourse with an SJW. The only winning move is not to play.
Microsoft doesn't want any users as a customer, anymore. The customers now are ad agencies and law enforcement/government. You and your data are the product being sold.
Amazon has also begun closing accounts of people who "abuse" the return policy, in Amazon's opinion
Meanwhile, they encourage you to subscribe to Prime and use it to buy items like clothing and shoes, which you obviously can't try on until they've been delivered. But heaven forbid stuff doesn't fit and you want to return it, now you're "abusing" the system and your account is terminated; by the way, thanks for all the Prime payments!
Nice racket they have going.
Which I suspect is why it's not covered more by the media (a huge majority of whom are against the death penalty).
It's kept out of the media to discourage suicide. People in general are not aware that there's a clean, fast, painless, and relatively accessible way to "check out," and this is by design. Especially with regards to the clean part. A surprising number of suicidal individuals don't go through with it solely because the more traditional methods (gun, knife, train,...) would leave a big mess for someone else to deal with.
Wait, why does the direction of the track change from day to day? Is it some kind of moving walkway where they want the machine to wear evenly in both directions?
I don't know if I'd go so far as to call Comey a traitor, but lying to Congress and spying on millions of his fellow citizens does make him very un-American.
NASA's open innovation project manager tells FastCompany that women "are looking for signals that they will be in a safe space where they feel like they belong,"
I'm sorry, is there a demonstrable history of rape and sexual assault taking place at NASA conventions, or is this just yet more SJW feminist nonsense?
It's the same with Amazon Prime - they seem to want to push it on me so bad that it must be a really valuable sale for them, which likely means it's not a good deal for me.
When Greenpeace says the sky isn't falling after all, it goes entirely against their agenda, so it might be the only time to take them at face value. Imagine if MADD put out a story saying drunk driving is at an all time low, they aren't likely to be lying about that, because scaring people into thinking the opposite is how they get funding. If even Greenpeace is willing to say China's coal consumption is decelerating, they're probably onto something.
The more we're compared to one other, the less anyone will ever be happy. For a site where most readers understand that pitting minorities vs. whites or middle class vs. poor is how the wealthy elites keep the unwashed masses distracted from their exploits, Slashdot sure seems determined to futher all of this gender-based fomentation.
No kidding. Remember, the UK recently made porn that depicts face-sitting or female squirting illegal. As well, the UK doesn't have the free speech protections that America does, and America doesn't always have the free speech protections it's supposed to. What I find most interesting is that porno/fetish only makes up about 1% of.onion sites and drugs account for only 4%. Listening to the media, the "dark web" is 110% child porn and 93% drug trafficking, which adds up to 451% illegal. It is of course no wonder that most people surveyed want it shut down.
Crypto and homebrew don't belong in the same sentence. Even the experts occasionally get it wrong and they have decades of design and implementation experience behind them. This one is best left to the pros, with audits of their work.
just to block one ad provider, an improvement in any way over a DNS server with one entry for
zone "doubleclick.net" IN { type master; notify no; file "blackhole.rev"; };
Not only is DNS far more efficient... When DoubleClick adds 10 new ad servers tomorrow, I already have them blocked, whereas you have to find them in the first place and add them to your HOSTS file and then update your HOSTS file across all your machines.
How many lines long is your HOSTS file now, anyway...?
Slashdot Mirror
In 5 years you may not be able to buy a dumb TV anymore, as manufacturers are shifting away from them. It's rather onerous to buy a dumb TV now, unless you want to order one online and deal with returning the first couple that show up broken. Go to any big box store and look at the big screen display televisions they have hooked up. Almost every one of them is internet enabled and some of them are internet required. As in, if you turn on your TV and it can't phone home to the mother ship, you aren't watching anything today. Not even from your DVD player.
A TV is no longer an appliance that you buy, own, and use as you see fit. Having a TV in your home is quickly becoming a "service" that you must license and rent from a company like Samsung. Of course Samsung won't send you a monthly bill like the cable company does; they'll get their cut through the device itself, with always-on microphones, viewer analysis that would make the Neilsen ratings people cream their pants, unskippable advertising, and constant spying on your household to monetize you. This isn't tinfoil hat stuff, it's been evolving for a few years already.
The masses will accept these Telescreen devices because the price goes down a couple hundred dollars. And the manufacturers will stop making televisions that don't do this shit. Give it a few years and trying to buy a dumb TV that doesn't require internet access will get you blank stares or laughed out of the store like you'd get if you tried to buy a CRT television today. You and I, who want to buy a TV without any of these "features," will be relegated to poking around at garage sales hoping to find one that still works.
It's mostly because of SJWs that the fraud was allowed to continue as long as it did. They wanted so badly for a woman to take the industry by storm that they threw due diligence to the wind. Questioning a woman is misogyny now, and no one dared look behind the curtain lest the poster child for female CEOs be found not wearing any clothes. In the end they lost their own shirts, bit of poetry if you ask me.
The entire lawsuit was a hit piece called out them. It's chilling.
You say this as if the lawsuit was fabricated out of thin air and there was no cause for action. As if you think Thiel sat down one day and say "I know, Hulk! Let's make up something to sue Gawker about!"
Gawker did something illegal. How is it a hit piece to sue them over that? What difference does it make who pays the plaintiff's attorneys? The suit is just as valid no matter who bankrolls it. Gawker brought this entirely on themselves. If Gawker hadn't BROKEN THE LAW, we wouldn't be having this conversation, Thiel or no Thiel.
This isn't you or some private individual or company that's telling Gawker to shut up, this is a judge declaring that Gawker's publication was illegal under US law.
That was not declared by a judge, it was decided by a jury.
Once a criminal serves their time in prison, or more likely are simply released with a caution or ASBO, they are Reformed. They will be good for their entire life, so landlords and the like have no right to know whether their would-be tenant blew up his last two apartments and left meth-lab chemicals saturating the walls to neighboring units.
So your preferred alternative is that once released, this person should be marked for life, and no one will ever rent to them again? You enjoy having a large homeless population in your city, do you?
Am I missing something, or are the folks guiding these companies steering them toward potential big trouble?
Surely "big trouble" is reserved for the guys who don't cooperate with NSA and friends. All of this spying is probably of some marketing value to Microsoft, but I'm thinking the real benefit is a cozy arrangement with big brother.
Don't forget to thank Secretaries Powell and Rice and also George W. Bush. Or is it only bad when a democrat does it?
It doesn't destroy any arguments. Apple can make concessions to the government of China in order to continue doing business there, without volunteering to make the same concessions to the American government. We're supposed to have more rights in the US than they do in China, and people at Apple think those rights are worth fighting for.
The second amendment specifically states the right to bear arms is for use in a militia.
No it doesn't, it uses the necessity of a militia as a reason justify why the people (not "the militia") have the right to bear arms. Take the following hypothetical statement:
"Proper sanitation, being necessary to the preparation of healthy food, the right of the people to wash their hands, shall not be infringed."
Would you interpret that statement to say that only people who prepare food are allowed to wash their hands?
Why does a TV need internet anyway as long as you're not dumb enough to jump on the smart tv bandwagon.
In 5 years you may not be able to buy a dumb TV anymore, as manufacturers are shifting away from them. It's rather onerous to buy a dumb TV now, unless you want to order one online and deal with returning the first couple that show up broken. Go to any big box store and look at the big screen display televisions they have hooked up. Almost every one of them is internet enabled and some of them are internet required. As in, if you turn on your TV and it can't phone home to the mother ship, you aren't watching anything today. Not even from your DVD player.
A TV is no longer an appliance that you buy, own, and use as you see fit. Having a TV in your home is quickly becoming a "service" that you must license and rent from a company like Samsung. Of course Samsung won't send you a monthly bill like the cable company does; they'll get their cut through the device itself, with always-on microphones, viewer analysis that would make the Neilsen ratings people cream their pants, unskippable advertising, and constant spying on your household to monetize you. This isn't tinfoil hat stuff, it's been evolving for a few years already.
The masses will accept these Telescreen devices because the price goes down a couple hundred dollars. And the manufacturers will stop making televisions that don't do this shit. Give it a few years and trying to buy a dumb TV that doesn't require internet access will get you blank stares or laughed out of the store like you'd get if you tried to buy a CRT television today. You and I, who want to buy a TV without any of these "features," will be relegated to poking around at garage sales hoping to find one that still works.
I notice his kids seem to have some kind of work ethic too.
Not so adept at registering to vote, though.
Why can't we have intelligent discourse on this site, instead of this polarizing nonsense?
There is no intelligent discourse when SJWs are involved, as discourse by definition requires that both sides are permitted to engage. Anytime an SJW says it's time to "have a conversation about $TOPIC," what they really mean is they're prepared to lecture you about $TOPIC. If you try to present any opposing viewpoints - you know, your side of the conversation they claimed to be interested in starting - they'll use whatever tools are at their disposal to suppress your opinions. If it's social media, they block you; if it's a discussion forum, they ban you from it; if it's a public venue, they petition to have you disinvited as a speaker. They call this "no-platforming," as it sounds a bit less insidious than "censorship." Once you've been muted from the supposed conversation, that's when the real fun begins. Coordinated harassment that you aren't able to respond to, doxing, attempts to get you fired from your job, in some cases even false criminal charges. All because you dared to disagree with someone on the internet.
No, it's best not to attempt intelligent discourse with an SJW. The only winning move is not to play.
Microsoft doesn't want any users as a customer, anymore. The customers now are ad agencies and law enforcement/government. You and your data are the product being sold.
Amazon has also begun closing accounts of people who "abuse" the return policy, in Amazon's opinion
Meanwhile, they encourage you to subscribe to Prime and use it to buy items like clothing and shoes, which you obviously can't try on until they've been delivered. But heaven forbid stuff doesn't fit and you want to return it, now you're "abusing" the system and your account is terminated; by the way, thanks for all the Prime payments! Nice racket they have going.
The shame is that people were so eager to push the "successful female CEO" angle, they overlooked the fact that she was selling snake oil.
Which I suspect is why it's not covered more by the media (a huge majority of whom are against the death penalty).
It's kept out of the media to discourage suicide. People in general are not aware that there's a clean, fast, painless, and relatively accessible way to "check out," and this is by design. Especially with regards to the clean part. A surprising number of suicidal individuals don't go through with it solely because the more traditional methods (gun, knife, train, ...) would leave a big mess for someone else to deal with.
Wait, why does the direction of the track change from day to day? Is it some kind of moving walkway where they want the machine to wear evenly in both directions?
I don't know if I'd go so far as to call Comey a traitor, but lying to Congress and spying on millions of his fellow citizens does make him very un-American.
NASA's open innovation project manager tells FastCompany that women "are looking for signals that they will be in a safe space where they feel like they belong,"
I'm sorry, is there a demonstrable history of rape and sexual assault taking place at NASA conventions, or is this just yet more SJW feminist nonsense?
It's the same with Amazon Prime - they seem to want to push it on me so bad that it must be a really valuable sale for them, which likely means it's not a good deal for me.
That's the exact feeling I get about Windows 10.
Says Greenpeace.
When Greenpeace says the sky isn't falling after all, it goes entirely against their agenda, so it might be the only time to take them at face value. Imagine if MADD put out a story saying drunk driving is at an all time low, they aren't likely to be lying about that, because scaring people into thinking the opposite is how they get funding. If even Greenpeace is willing to say China's coal consumption is decelerating, they're probably onto something.
The more we're compared to one other, the less anyone will ever be happy. For a site where most readers understand that pitting minorities vs. whites or middle class vs. poor is how the wealthy elites keep the unwashed masses distracted from their exploits, Slashdot sure seems determined to futher all of this gender-based fomentation.
No kidding. Remember, the UK recently made porn that depicts face-sitting or female squirting illegal. As well, the UK doesn't have the free speech protections that America does, and America doesn't always have the free speech protections it's supposed to. What I find most interesting is that porno/fetish only makes up about 1% of .onion sites and drugs account for only 4%. Listening to the media, the "dark web" is 110% child porn and 93% drug trafficking, which adds up to 451% illegal. It is of course no wonder that most people surveyed want it shut down.
Crypto and homebrew don't belong in the same sentence. Even the experts occasionally get it wrong and they have decades of design and implementation experience behind them. This one is best left to the pros, with audits of their work.
How is a HOSTS file with hundreds of lines worth of
0.0.0.0 1326154.fls.doubleclick.net ...
0.0.0.0 1330903.fls.doubleclick.net
0.0.0.0 1359940.fls.doubleclick.net
0.0.0.0 ad.terra.doubleclick.net
0.0.0.0 dp.g.doubleclick.net
just to block one ad provider, an improvement in any way over a DNS server with one entry for
zone "doubleclick.net" IN { type master; notify no; file "blackhole.rev"; };
Not only is DNS far more efficient... When DoubleClick adds 10 new ad servers tomorrow, I already have them blocked, whereas you have to find them in the first place and add them to your HOSTS file and then update your HOSTS file across all your machines.
How many lines long is your HOSTS file now, anyway...?