I, personally am worried that MS will drag their feet on adding new features, introducing a drag on communities that want to try to maintain "least common denominator" compatibility. If MS doesn't have the resources and will to keep up with kernel development, they will define the least common denominator.
I'm afraid useful features in the kernel will get ignored because WLS doesn't implement them or implements them poorly. It doesn't even have to be done maliciously.
it does not say that the ISPs must disable Internet access until consumers acknowledge the notification. The law even says that ISPs may make the notification "with a consumer's bill," which shouldn't disable anyone's Internet access.
First, what they did actually complies with Subsection (1)(b)(ii)(A). We may not like their approach, but it does comply with the law. Go read the law, it is a rather sparse 5 pages.
I suppose barricading customer's homes preventing entrance and exit until they acknowledge the new product would as well. But it should still violate other laws. As others have pointed out, there is the issue of blocking 911 calls via VOIP.
And then there is the issue of addressing computer free households that only have a roku, an internet aware thermostat and a flip-phone with really big buttons, all provided by the grand kids. Blame the politicians if you want, but I think it's on the internet business to be internet aware enough to look at the law and say "this should be another printout in the bill" as the law (aka the 'spec') suggested. As has been pointed out by one of the politicians, Centurylink is the only business that had this creative interpretation of the law.
If all (or even half) the people I've seen / heard complain about MS / Apple / Google / etc would do more than just complain, that would not be meaningless. But it doesn't happen. Most folks complain about the inconvenience as if they had no choice.
My kids are forced into google / gmail / google docs / etc by the school. You can force a rape victim to sign a paper too. That doesn't mean there was actual consent.
They have to build in the cruft. The extension language isn't powerful enough to do anything since they've downgraded their extension support. Most of the extensions that made firefox worth using for me don't work after the downgrade.
The few plugins that have been ported or replaced aren't feature complete compared to their pre-downgrade versions. The extension authors who haven't given up on firefox have forum pages listing dozens on firefox feature requests for features that need to be added back before their plugins with work again. Firefox isn't addressing those because they are too busy not fixing 11 year old security issues.
Yes, I'm irked with Mozilla. It's sad to see what they've become and that there isn't any hope of a open source (not open-core) competitor.
Nope. But I can still open the door to my house when the grid goes down. Sounds like people are having trouble running software locally (on their computers in their homes) now when there's a problem somewhere else in the world.
The idea of the perfect AI algorithm has been available for generations. Just simulate all possible next solutions and pick the path to best success.
When I was in AI classes, this wasn't considered AI. This was just an exhaustive search. AKA, brute force. The point in AI (back then) was to try to identify how people were able to intelligently avoid exhaustive searches of problem spaces while finding still a reasonably good solution so we could better simulate it in software.
I know there'll be issues with experimental stuff and bugs. I was talking about some bigger issues like this one : http://blogs.perl.org/users/le...
I've been noticing a growing number of ill planned changes in perl5 since (roughly) the 5.18 time frame. In that particular case, I think it's nasty that a use statement doesn't protect against the incompatibility. It would break your suggestion of using the use statement. I don't use Modern::Perl because most of the systems I use don't have it, I don't have root and don't like virtualenv type stuff (not that perl really has a great virtualenv type environment. Brew is a bit heavy weight and fiddling with the PERL%* vars is fiddly.)
I find targeting core perl 5.10 to be the safe bet for now when I'm at work. At home I'll target want I have.
The religious right used that same argument in the 80's while silencing any discussion of homosexuality as anything but perverse or deviant. Several people I know who opposed it then find it much more agreeable these days.
Don't intend to argue the comic is right or wrong, but I'm curious if the people who support that argument in one case supports it in all cases and if not, why?
That's not entirely true. I wish it were. Once they got into the higher 5.teen versions, they started adding features in an attempt to keep up with Perl 6, but they've done it kind of badly.
There's still a fairly safe sub-set of perl that work pretty well every where. But there have been some advanced changes dubbed 'non-experimental' to later be broken and then removed due to sloppiness while trying to stay 'modern'.
I though android also had something else going for it. I went to an embedded Linux conference that had an android app that would let you see the schedule, plan the sessions you wanted to attend and a few other things. In the opening session they explained that there wasn't a matching app for iOS, though not due to a lack of effort.
The conference included an android mini-conference. Apple wouldn't allow it in the app store. The recommendation from the speaker... "Use a more open platform...?"
I'm still not heard. I'm not listed in my state under my name or zip code. I pull the zip file with all the pdfs. If I'm in any of them, then my name is misspelled. Some of my neighbors are there.
I'm bummed. I gave it some thought instead of using a form letter campaign though I did mention the link of the one that got my attention. It was in favor of neutrality so I'm not accusing them of leaving out anti-neutrality posts. Maybe tl;dr? Still, my ego is dashed.
That seems to be getting harder and harder to do. Sure, you block incoming traffic, but more and more software is getting dependent on the "cloud" (in the somebody else's computer sense) and it's getting harder to run current software without allowing it to talk to huge swaths of internet. It doesn't matter if it's the new hot devops tools or the latest Windows. You can't run Office with a firewall without getting constant requests to phone all over the place.
It's irresponsible that businesses have allowed this to become the norm, but it is.
Doesn't Microsoft have a bunch of people on staff that think like black hats (probably because they used to be them) with the task of looking for problems like this?
I assumed that was who they had developing the system. I figured it was obvious when the original versions of Win10 would send your wireless credentials to everyone on any contact list it could find.
Slashdot Mirror
Bingo!
This is targeting cloud developers who won't learn Linux but have to target it.
I, personally am worried that MS will drag their feet on adding new features, introducing a drag on communities that want to try to maintain "least common denominator" compatibility. If MS doesn't have the resources and will to keep up with kernel development, they will define the least common denominator.
I'm afraid useful features in the kernel will get ignored because WLS doesn't implement them or implements them poorly. It doesn't even have to be done maliciously.
it does not say that the ISPs must disable Internet access until consumers acknowledge the notification. The law even says that ISPs may make the notification "with a consumer's bill," which shouldn't disable anyone's Internet access.
First, what they did actually complies with Subsection (1)(b)(ii)(A). We may not like their approach, but it does comply with the law. Go read the law, it is a rather sparse 5 pages.
I suppose barricading customer's homes preventing entrance and exit until they acknowledge the new product would as well. But it should still violate other laws. As others have pointed out, there is the issue of blocking 911 calls via VOIP.
And then there is the issue of addressing computer free households that only have a roku, an internet aware thermostat and a flip-phone with really big buttons, all provided by the grand kids. Blame the politicians if you want, but I think it's on the internet business to be internet aware enough to look at the law and say "this should be another printout in the bill" as the law (aka the 'spec') suggested. As has been pointed out by one of the politicians, Centurylink is the only business that had this creative interpretation of the law.
If all (or even half) the people I've seen / heard complain about MS / Apple / Google / etc would do more than just complain, that would not be meaningless. But it doesn't happen. Most folks complain about the inconvenience as if they had no choice.
Vote with your wallet or shut up. You have no other leverage or influence. The rest of these comments are just impotent rage.
Things could change if people actually cared as much as they complained.
The educational versions of all those apps don't collect data.
Except when they do. There have even been article posted here over the years of them getting caught.
https://www.wired.com/2015/12/...
My kids are forced into google / gmail / google docs / etc by the school. You can force a rape victim to sign a paper too. That doesn't mean there was actual consent.
They have to build in the cruft. The extension language isn't powerful enough to do anything since they've downgraded their extension support. Most of the extensions that made firefox worth using for me don't work after the downgrade.
The few plugins that have been ported or replaced aren't feature complete compared to their pre-downgrade versions. The extension authors who haven't given up on firefox have forum pages listing dozens on firefox feature requests for features that need to be added back before their plugins with work again. Firefox isn't addressing those because they are too busy not fixing 11 year old security issues.
Yes, I'm irked with Mozilla. It's sad to see what they've become and that there isn't any hope of a open source (not open-core) competitor.
Nope. But I can still open the door to my house when the grid goes down. Sounds like people are having trouble running software locally (on their computers in their homes) now when there's a problem somewhere else in the world.
The idea of the perfect AI algorithm has been available for generations. Just simulate all possible next solutions and pick the path to best success.
When I was in AI classes, this wasn't considered AI. This was just an exhaustive search. AKA, brute force. The point in AI (back then) was to try to identify how people were able to intelligently avoid exhaustive searches of problem spaces while finding still a reasonably good solution so we could better simulate it in software.
Well that, and some people wanted to build C-3PO.
understanding the world in terms of objects precedes self awareness in the only example we can study
So you're saying they've laid the foundation for skynet, right? I like the idea that understanding Montezuma's Revenge can lead to self awareness.
Ya? But can it get ultracentrifuges to play the Sing Song Serenade like my C64 could do with it's floppy drive?
I know there'll be issues with experimental stuff and bugs. I was talking about some bigger issues like this one :
http://blogs.perl.org/users/le...
I've been noticing a growing number of ill planned changes in perl5 since (roughly) the 5.18 time frame. In that particular case, I think it's nasty that a use statement doesn't protect against the incompatibility. It would break your suggestion of using the use statement. I don't use Modern::Perl because most of the systems I use don't have it, I don't have root and don't like virtualenv type stuff (not that perl really has a great virtualenv type environment. Brew is a bit heavy weight and fiddling with the PERL%* vars is fiddly.)
I find targeting core perl 5.10 to be the safe bet for now when I'm at work. At home I'll target want I have.
The religious right used that same argument in the 80's while silencing any discussion of homosexuality as anything but perverse or deviant. Several people I know who opposed it then find it much more agreeable these days.
Don't intend to argue the comic is right or wrong, but I'm curious if the people who support that argument in one case supports it in all cases and if not, why?
That's not entirely true. I wish it were. Once they got into the higher 5.teen versions, they started adding features in an attempt to keep up with Perl 6, but they've done it kind of badly.
There's still a fairly safe sub-set of perl that work pretty well every where. But there have been some advanced changes dubbed 'non-experimental' to later be broken and then removed due to sloppiness while trying to stay 'modern'.
Carriers can make this possible provided they get dibs on the data generated.
How long until a camera is embedded under the screen so it can't be blocked without covering the screen?
I though android also had something else going for it. I went to an embedded Linux conference that had an android app that would let you see the schedule, plan the sessions you wanted to attend and a few other things. In the opening session they explained that there wasn't a matching app for iOS, though not due to a lack of effort.
The conference included an android mini-conference. Apple wouldn't allow it in the app store. The recommendation from the speaker ...
"Use a more open platform...?"
I'm still not heard. I'm not listed in my state under my name or zip code. I pull the zip file with all the pdfs. If I'm in any of them, then my name is misspelled. Some of my neighbors are there.
I'm bummed. I gave it some thought instead of using a form letter campaign though I did mention the link of the one that got my attention. It was in favor of neutrality so I'm not accusing them of leaving out anti-neutrality posts. Maybe tl;dr? Still, my ego is dashed.
I stopped the lesser of evils thing too. But I still go to the polls and write in a name to do my part to push the post one half a vote.
That seems to be getting harder and harder to do. Sure, you block incoming traffic, but more and more software is getting dependent on the "cloud" (in the somebody else's computer sense) and it's getting harder to run current software without allowing it to talk to huge swaths of internet. It doesn't matter if it's the new hot devops tools or the latest Windows. You can't run Office with a firewall without getting constant requests to phone all over the place.
It's irresponsible that businesses have allowed this to become the norm, but it is.
I don't think you know who Al's father is. (Or rather isn't.)
That's why they will be attached to a surface with no exposed wires, like the smoke detectors.
"Um ... Well John ... I don't know? Russian hackers? Yah, that's it... Don't give me that look."
Doesn't Microsoft have a bunch of people on staff that think like black hats (probably because they used to be them) with the task of looking for problems like this?
I assumed that was who they had developing the system. I figured it was obvious when the original versions of Win10 would send your wireless credentials to everyone on any contact list it could find.