Awesome, it just shows even more how low Trump's regime is willing to go with this charade of a democracy. Unlawful invasion of privacy for incrimination without recourse. Guilty until proven innocent. It's the sort of thing I'd expect from dictatorships. You dare to protest against the current administration, a riot happened during the protests, everyone who was detained there automatically loses their common rights because they need to prove themselves innocents - not what any sane democracy would do, which would be innocent until proven guilty. We're not even talking about terrorism charges here anymore people. Every idiot who is saying this is good seems to have absolutely no idea of how a democracy works. You keep vouching for this type of police overreach, one day it'll come back to bite you in the ass.
This might be for the best... I mean, it's not like automation is gonna work in a 100 years or so considering how the traffic works in cities like Mumbai or Delhi.:P They'd need to invent a new class 6 level to go through something like that.
How is it going to be enforced? Court ruling is useless wihout instruments to make it work. I can only see things going one way: ultimately, it's just the same as China's governmental firewall and other countries that demands companies to have special filters and special rules put in place to operate inside the country. And that only affects Internet access inside the country, it cannot and will not be enforced anywhere else by some sheer will and bravado. If the data that is supposed to be erased is lying outside France or the EU, they won't be able to do anything without international agreements and a huge ammount of diplomacy. This is actually worse than what China demands. And if neither the company nor the country's government it's located at decides to comply, then it goes towards sanctions and whatnot... which is something I highly doubt any country government would be willing to do for something as controversial as rights of people to demand that content about themselves be erased from servers, or access to it be unlisted from search engines. And don't get me wrong, I'm all for a privacy pushback, and privacy protection, but this isn't how it's gonna happen. This is bravado. Politicians and judges all around the world are behaving like spoiled brats these days, and it's starting to look really bad.
Just think about it. France is telling us to go after Google because it didn't erase information that our citizens requested from servers located in our country. Fuck that shit. What government is going to comply with something like that without asking something in return? Forget US that obviously has a ton of lobbyists there to dissuade politicians from taking any action, imagine other countries that are far more corrupt, that have more important priorities, and/or don't give a shit about what France or EU wants. It's quickly becoming too apparent how much inside a magical bubble some politicians and judges seem to live in. Time to wake up, stop wasting time, and put up laws and rulings that have real effects, not just this stream of bullshit that is never going to catch.
At this point it seems Comcast is coming up with the most bullshit drivel they can muster to see if people get confused by them and ultimately believe by default... I wonder what's next. Fast lanes are needed to solve climate change, create a cure for cancer, and avoid WW3? As if car automation would rely on Comcast service whatever form it comes, and as if Comcast could guarantee instantaneous data transmission for them. Pretty much the opposite is true. Comcast and the others that are part of the ISP oligopolies are the ones doing everything they can to stop initiatives like Google Fiber. If there's any hope for true instantaneous data transmission ever, it will come from technology that will ultimately break the current oligopolies, like indefinite expansion of Google Fi. These jokers keep throwing shit to see if it sticks at legislators and the public.
Not unlike other periods in history of Microsoft, the company is dead set in following trends, cloning the crap, and ignoring user input for Windows 10. We've been warning Microsoft since Windows 8 that the direction they were taking was anti-consumer. Microsoft keeps ignoring input and focusing on crap no one asked for. Windows Phone, Surface RT, and now this incredibly stupid Surface Laptop with the turd on top that's Windows 10S. They had the problematic aggressive update scheme, they put ads everywhere, they still keep trying to force the bankrupt Windows Store that no one cares about. It's too bad really. Microsoft always had a huge talent pool inside the company, particularly inside Microsoft Research, but they keep ignoring the good stuff to force this idiocy that no one cares for. They seemed to be turning to a better direction with Windows 7, but then they let crap hit the fan and are only getting worse now. I've been using Windows since 3.11, and Windows 10 finally did it for me. I have two other machines running Ubuntu, and if things keep going the direction they are I'll be moving to it entirely. Guess I'll need virtualization or a separate machine only to run games and a few other apps.
I use both MPC-HC and VLC, and MPC-HC is pretty feature complete. In fact, I often times skip updates for it because it just works well as is. I think I encountered a few times where MPC-HC worked better because it was lighter, and I like the simpler interface I guess. So there you are, thanks for all the development, I hope it can keep going with this final release for a long time.
I usually like the stance against huge monopolies like Google and Microsoft that EU goes for, but not when it's in support of asshole troll associations like MPAA and RIAA.
Honestly, I want to see YouTube just outright removing all music videos licensed under big labels that lobby under RIAA just to see what would happen. They'll never do it, and RIAA will keep whinning and begging for more money (occasionally using artists to do it) 'till the end of times, but I'd want to see that happens just so that these associations take another shot in the foot like the multiple ones they already did.
It's quite obvious what happens when labels decide to take their content out of hugely popular platforms to put into stuff like Tidal and other crap like that. You already tried those, you lost it.
Honestly, from a cold perspective, here's what happens: everyone that's not willing to pay for a streaming service subscription or doesn't have money to keep paying directly for digital music goes to YouTube, plain and simple. The idea that a majority of people who goes to YouTube would migrate to paid streaming services or outright buying digital music is as ridiculous as saying that every pirated music would automatically translate to CD or digital music sales in the past. It doesn't. We all know that, despite the likes of RIAA and MPAA repeating this mantra to death.
YouTube won't pay more for those views because it would disrupt business for them with advertisers, they can't keep business afloat with something like this because they have multiple times more views in comparison to paid subscription music streaming services, and the music industry also cannot give away such a lucrative stream of revenue.
It's all kinda bullshit anyways. YouTube has contracts with major music labels. This isn't some sort of charity or fine that YouTube pay for them. Music labels signed deals with YouTube to get that revenue. If YouTube doesn't have a contract with a specific label that has music on YouTube, the video gets flagged and taken down by the overzealous automatic DMCA bot. So the licensed music that is on YouTube is there because there is a signed contract agreement on both sides stating that 1 buck every 1000 plays is the deal. And it's far better than what most people creating content on YouTube gets. It's far better than what creators making content exclusively for YouTube that is not only music but also video gets.
You can't compare YouTube with streaming services as if the model of business was the same. It's like saying that TV stations should pay the same as Cable TV which should pay the same as movie theaters for content. They don't. They all have different contracts that will stipulate payment based on how each media makes money, which in turn is directly related to target audience and revenue stream.
The comparison that needs to be made is what music labels get on YouTube versus what all the rest do. Music labels have a far better deal. If I had a buck for every 1000 views on my videos, even though I have almost nothing published, I'd still be making a living from almost nothing. The RIAA is complaining about having an incredible deal effortlessly. If they really think the whole thing is unfair, cancel your contracts and tell YouTube to remove all their intellectual properties from the website. They don't do it because they don't want to lose the revenue. And if they were so sure that people would migrate to other music streaming services, they would have done it already.
I'm not american so I don't have to worry about stuff like this, but let me tell you guys that this isn't a great signal and people should be extremely careful about ideas like those... Obviously, as with anything else, education is never perfect. People will pick and choose the worst examples to say how colleges and whatnot are awful. But that fact that there are indeed bad colleges and bad education does not mean that no education is the better alternative. I've heard this rhetoric of universities and college degrees being worthless here were I live before. It was among the justifications for electing a couple of presidents that never went through college and university plus a whole bunch of politicians taking representative seats. And I'm not saying that people who didn't go through college and university are always idiots, stupid, ignorants and bad administrators... nothing like that. Some of the brightest people I know don't have a degree, or ended up working in areas unrelated to their degrees. But what we've seen here was a weird and misguided glorification of ignorance. Picking exceptional cases like millionaires who flunked higher education to put it as the norm, people thinking it was better to vote for politicians that did not have a degree in anything, and a misguided idea that not having passed through college or university education meant that the candidate was "more honest", "closer to the people", "knew what poor people passed through" and stuff like that.
The end result of all that is a country in deep recession with the worst corruption crisis in history, one ex-president arrested, another impeached, and one current that should be impeached, tons of politicians in jail, numerous example cases of extremely bad administrative decisions, and the general sense that the country is indeed run by ignorants, corrupt people and bad decisions.
Sure people love to talk about the SJW epidemic, all the white knighting, all the young adults behaving like spoiled brats, political correctedness, plus a bunch of other stuff. It's easy to blame institutions for behaviours like those, but more often than not, it's an age thing. People get this skewed perception that bad things happen on campus while ignoring all the shit that happens outside of it.
So there you go. Sure, college isn't perfect. A degree isn't an indication of morals, ethics and great behaviour. And there are plenty of people who do very well without going through college. But people better be careful about sweeping generalizations, because some lines of reasoning (or lack thereof) can end up very very badly.
For instance, here in Brazil, in some cities, you are supposed to carry around a bit of cash... The reason goes beyond the idea that is dangerous to carry cash around. It's because if criminals get to you and you have no money to give away, you might end up beaten, kidnapped or even dead. I'm not joking. There are some cities in Brazil, particularly the biggest and most densely packed, in which people understand things that way. I have a bunch of relatives living in Sao Paulo that all say the same thing. I'll visit them every year, but I'd never live there.
There are several things to consider here regarding your security in cases of armed robbery. Drug users could be desperate and not having cash could be pretty bad. If you only have credit cards and whatnot, criminals could take you in what's known as "flash kidnapping", taking you to ATMs to forcibly get money out at gun point. We have multiple cases like that every years. I have one relative that was involved in a traffic accident, criminals took the chance to mug him, but as he didn't have more than 10 bucks on him at the time they also decided to beat him up.
Then again, carrying too much money around all the time to places on your daily routine is a dead giveaway that you are loaded. I've seen cases time and time again of people who carried money and paid in cash everywhere getting robbed or even worse because criminals learned about their routines. Oh, it's probably also a big reason why tourists gets mugged a lot in touristic cities around here... happens all the time in Rio de Janeiro beaches, only it's a bunch of people running around taking everything they see from tourists and beachgoers in something called "arrastao". Yes, we even have a name for it, as we have a specific word for robbery followed by assassination - "latrocinio".
These sorts of things probably happens less often in US, Canada, UK and whatnot, but hey, learn from the crappier countries' experience. xD
Without context and in isolation this will probably sound weird for most people, but what it really represents is that employers should judge job applicants only on stuff that applicants are aware of and in control. It's a single thing that composes a set of laws on fair and equal opportunity for employment... which will probably get into a far more comprehensive set of discussions, but just so people know.
The lawsuit is frivolous and makes absolutely no sense, but it calls attention to something way more serious. Twitter, or a Twitter account is NOT public forum, it should never be consider public forum, and people advocating for something like this are crazy for doing so. The very basis for something to be considered public forum is that it has to be government owned. @realDonaldTrump not only is a personal account, it also belongs to a private service. It can't and won't be considered public forum because if that happens, the consequences of that would be far reaching and a plain nightmare. It would automatically call for regulation and monitoring of private channels.
But it indeed calls attention on how mismanaged the current administration is. A personal account on a private service should not and cannot be used to make official governmental statements. This is not only unprofessional, it's downright irresponsible. I know lots of people nowadays scoff at the notion of proper procedures, but there's a reason why they are in place, and it has to do not only with the proper distance that has to be kept between government and private businesses, but also with security and management. That is to say, of course governmental branches and individuals can and should keep open line of communications in all relevant platforms, but not conduct business and use them as official channels. It's an entirely other discussion, but there you are.
I've read about this yesterday, and what came to mind is that building housing on a landfill is not the major issue there... it's the desperation part.
Of course people behind the project will try to dissuade skeptics with fancy tech buzzwords and whatnot saying they will take proper care and do it right, but the thing is that landfills are pretty much unpredictable. They are only accounting for stuff they can imagine will happen, and even so, I highly doubt they'll invest much into it.
And then, of course, when housing is desperatedly needed and these construction firms are expected to get huge profits from it, they will cut corners the first opportunity they get. This isn't charity with limitless funding, it's business. It's cheaper for them to deal with liability later on than really spend all the money possible to make sure nothing bad will happen, because it's a game of probabilities.
Then again, people have been moving to big urban centers to live a crap live inside shoebox sized apartments all the time, closing all windows to avoid the smog, noise pollution and whatnot. Living on top of a landfill doesn't seem too far out. And I'm willing to bet that when these get available, they'll still sell for too much.
Just remember people, it's a different culture. Japan has an aging population and very packed urban centers... Driving classes are very strict, they have a policy about new drivers using different plates, clear identification, and not driving by themselves. That and public transportation being very nice there.
It's a country that is anxiously waiting for autonomous cars to arrive.
Here in Brazil, elderly drivers aren't much of a problem... in fact, among all age ranges they are the ones least involved in car accidents. Age range between 30-40 are the ones involved with accidents the most.
The AR element in Pokemon Go wasn't more than novelty, and you can easily play the game without it... what made the game popular was the GPS functionality and the franchise name of course.
It is the whole problem with AR and VR. We are still missing a full step to making both convenient enough to be used without caveats. For AR, think of it integrated in regular glass frames. For VR it also needs to be some sort of regular glasses, not something that is closer to a helmet.
If we're talking about AR in smartphones, I don't think it'll ever have a directly related explosion in popularity anytime soon. You need to be constantly pointing out your camera at stuff, and this can become extremely inconvenient at times. Perhaps games with few bursts of this that have a very complex image recognition algorithm to identify objects and whatnot, but it'll still be a game that might initially explode in popularity due to novelty, but will be hard to manage a huge following for a long time.
We'll see where this goes. It's hard to imagine huge popularity because evolution of tech is dependant on overcoming some pretty big obstacles... battery is one that comes to mind. We're getting close to flexible transparent OLED displays. And perhaps wireless data high speed and low latency transmission is right around the corner too.
I'm still not too sure what was the objective of the original article (on TechCrunch), but it appears to be confusing some stuff there. It appears whoever wrote it also never had any experience in online learning, which is just weird.
We already have plenty of similar platforms for education as Netflix is for entertainment. Lynda.com, Khan Academy, Coursera, EdX, Udemy, Udacity to name a few. Kinda egregious that the article talked about none of those despite them being as popular and ubiquitous as Netflix.
But what the article is really talking about is an AI powered platform that aggregates all sorts of educational information that's far more focused on specific tasks, and tools for getting in contact with real instructors and whatnot. That's not Netflix for learning... that's basically online classes. And they exist too. They could be helped with some new tools for material aggregation, but in the end it'll need to be curated in some way, so it'll only extend what online courses are.
You don't go to Netflix to search for specific bits and pieces of entertainment... you get served a pre-selected and pre-curated range of movies. They are either missing the point or making a very bad analogy.
It's just another weird article talking about the miracles AI will supposedly make happen, but with a very shallow understanding of what it's talking about...
Different but kinda similar thing, I was saying post 9/11, TSA launch, recent Patriot Act passing fear mongering that given enough room, Airlines would start forcing passengers to get a change of clothes pre-flight, absolutely no carry on allowed, then get sedated, and then pille everyone up like luggage inside planes with the excuse of it being for the security of the flight or something.
I guess this one is at least honest about the objective.
People already get extremely packed inside public transportation anyways, so this should be fine, right? Well, that is until you consider how long it takes before and after flight, how you can't exit the plane if the situation becomes too uncomfortable, how you are not running along roads but rather climbing up and going down the skies inside a metal can, how turbulence can be far more dangerous with a pack of people standing up than sitting in a comfortable position, how the last thing you want inside a plane is people panicking and running around, how dangerous scenarios like depressurization, major turbulence, and other types of problems can become catastrophic extremely fast if you have people standing...
It's quite obvious for people who fly frequently... those warning to sit down and fast the seatbelt are out of precaution, but they are there for a reason.
I mean, let this pass and we'll see how it goes. But I'm not going inside one of those, like ever. And I wouldn't invest on the airline behind this. I guarantee you that after not long, the airline would be sued to oblivion.
Slashdot Mirror
...because the poster apparently didn't.
It wasn't a hack at all.
https://www.cnet.com/news/ever...
Awesome, it just shows even more how low Trump's regime is willing to go with this charade of a democracy.
Unlawful invasion of privacy for incrimination without recourse. Guilty until proven innocent.
It's the sort of thing I'd expect from dictatorships. You dare to protest against the current administration, a riot happened during the protests, everyone who was detained there automatically loses their common rights because they need to prove themselves innocents - not what any sane democracy would do, which would be innocent until proven guilty. We're not even talking about terrorism charges here anymore people.
Every idiot who is saying this is good seems to have absolutely no idea of how a democracy works.
You keep vouching for this type of police overreach, one day it'll come back to bite you in the ass.
This might be for the best... I mean, it's not like automation is gonna work in a 100 years or so considering how the traffic works in cities like Mumbai or Delhi. :P
They'd need to invent a new class 6 level to go through something like that.
Because they are full of shit, as always.
How is it going to be enforced? Court ruling is useless wihout instruments to make it work.
I can only see things going one way: ultimately, it's just the same as China's governmental firewall and other countries that demands companies to have special filters and special rules put in place to operate inside the country. And that only affects Internet access inside the country, it cannot and will not be enforced anywhere else by some sheer will and bravado.
If the data that is supposed to be erased is lying outside France or the EU, they won't be able to do anything without international agreements and a huge ammount of diplomacy.
This is actually worse than what China demands.
And if neither the company nor the country's government it's located at decides to comply, then it goes towards sanctions and whatnot...
which is something I highly doubt any country government would be willing to do for something as controversial as rights of people to demand that content about themselves be erased from servers, or access to it be unlisted from search engines.
And don't get me wrong, I'm all for a privacy pushback, and privacy protection, but this isn't how it's gonna happen. This is bravado. Politicians and judges all around the world are behaving like spoiled brats these days, and it's starting to look really bad.
Just think about it. France is telling us to go after Google because it didn't erase information that our citizens requested from servers located in our country. Fuck that shit. What government is going to comply with something like that without asking something in return? Forget US that obviously has a ton of lobbyists there to dissuade politicians from taking any action, imagine other countries that are far more corrupt, that have more important priorities, and/or don't give a shit about what France or EU wants.
It's quickly becoming too apparent how much inside a magical bubble some politicians and judges seem to live in. Time to wake up, stop wasting time, and put up laws and rulings that have real effects, not just this stream of bullshit that is never going to catch.
At this point it seems Comcast is coming up with the most bullshit drivel they can muster to see if people get confused by them and ultimately believe by default... I wonder what's next. Fast lanes are needed to solve climate change, create a cure for cancer, and avoid WW3?
As if car automation would rely on Comcast service whatever form it comes, and as if Comcast could guarantee instantaneous data transmission for them.
Pretty much the opposite is true. Comcast and the others that are part of the ISP oligopolies are the ones doing everything they can to stop initiatives like Google Fiber. If there's any hope for true instantaneous data transmission ever, it will come from technology that will ultimately break the current oligopolies, like indefinite expansion of Google Fi.
These jokers keep throwing shit to see if it sticks at legislators and the public.
Not unlike other periods in history of Microsoft, the company is dead set in following trends, cloning the crap, and ignoring user input for Windows 10.
We've been warning Microsoft since Windows 8 that the direction they were taking was anti-consumer.
Microsoft keeps ignoring input and focusing on crap no one asked for.
Windows Phone, Surface RT, and now this incredibly stupid Surface Laptop with the turd on top that's Windows 10S.
They had the problematic aggressive update scheme, they put ads everywhere, they still keep trying to force the bankrupt Windows Store that no one cares about.
It's too bad really. Microsoft always had a huge talent pool inside the company, particularly inside Microsoft Research, but they keep ignoring the good stuff to force this idiocy that no one cares for. They seemed to be turning to a better direction with Windows 7, but then they let crap hit the fan and are only getting worse now.
I've been using Windows since 3.11, and Windows 10 finally did it for me. I have two other machines running Ubuntu, and if things keep going the direction they are I'll be moving to it entirely. Guess I'll need virtualization or a separate machine only to run games and a few other apps.
I use both MPC-HC and VLC, and MPC-HC is pretty feature complete. In fact, I often times skip updates for it because it just works well as is.
I think I encountered a few times where MPC-HC worked better because it was lighter, and I like the simpler interface I guess.
So there you are, thanks for all the development, I hope it can keep going with this final release for a long time.
I usually like the stance against huge monopolies like Google and Microsoft that EU goes for, but not when it's in support of asshole troll associations like MPAA and RIAA.
Honestly, I want to see YouTube just outright removing all music videos licensed under big labels that lobby under RIAA just to see what would happen. They'll never do it, and RIAA will keep whinning and begging for more money (occasionally using artists to do it) 'till the end of times, but I'd want to see that happens just so that these associations take another shot in the foot like the multiple ones they already did.
It's quite obvious what happens when labels decide to take their content out of hugely popular platforms to put into stuff like Tidal and other crap like that. You already tried those, you lost it.
Honestly, from a cold perspective, here's what happens: everyone that's not willing to pay for a streaming service subscription or doesn't have money to keep paying directly for digital music goes to YouTube, plain and simple. The idea that a majority of people who goes to YouTube would migrate to paid streaming services or outright buying digital music is as ridiculous as saying that every pirated music would automatically translate to CD or digital music sales in the past. It doesn't. We all know that, despite the likes of RIAA and MPAA repeating this mantra to death.
YouTube won't pay more for those views because it would disrupt business for them with advertisers, they can't keep business afloat with something like this because they have multiple times more views in comparison to paid subscription music streaming services, and the music industry also cannot give away such a lucrative stream of revenue.
It's all kinda bullshit anyways. YouTube has contracts with major music labels. This isn't some sort of charity or fine that YouTube pay for them. Music labels signed deals with YouTube to get that revenue. If YouTube doesn't have a contract with a specific label that has music on YouTube, the video gets flagged and taken down by the overzealous automatic DMCA bot. So the licensed music that is on YouTube is there because there is a signed contract agreement on both sides stating that 1 buck every 1000 plays is the deal. And it's far better than what most people creating content on YouTube gets. It's far better than what creators making content exclusively for YouTube that is not only music but also video gets.
You can't compare YouTube with streaming services as if the model of business was the same. It's like saying that TV stations should pay the same as Cable TV which should pay the same as movie theaters for content. They don't. They all have different contracts that will stipulate payment based on how each media makes money, which in turn is directly related to target audience and revenue stream.
The comparison that needs to be made is what music labels get on YouTube versus what all the rest do. Music labels have a far better deal. If I had a buck for every 1000 views on my videos, even though I have almost nothing published, I'd still be making a living from almost nothing. The RIAA is complaining about having an incredible deal effortlessly. If they really think the whole thing is unfair, cancel your contracts and tell YouTube to remove all their intellectual properties from the website. They don't do it because they don't want to lose the revenue. And if they were so sure that people would migrate to other music streaming services, they would have done it already.
I'm not american so I don't have to worry about stuff like this, but let me tell you guys that this isn't a great signal and people should be extremely careful about ideas like those...
Obviously, as with anything else, education is never perfect. People will pick and choose the worst examples to say how colleges and whatnot are awful.
But that fact that there are indeed bad colleges and bad education does not mean that no education is the better alternative.
I've heard this rhetoric of universities and college degrees being worthless here were I live before. It was among the justifications for electing a couple of presidents that never went through college and university plus a whole bunch of politicians taking representative seats.
And I'm not saying that people who didn't go through college and university are always idiots, stupid, ignorants and bad administrators... nothing like that. Some of the brightest people I know don't have a degree, or ended up working in areas unrelated to their degrees.
But what we've seen here was a weird and misguided glorification of ignorance. Picking exceptional cases like millionaires who flunked higher education to put it as the norm, people thinking it was better to vote for politicians that did not have a degree in anything, and a misguided idea that not having passed through college or university education meant that the candidate was "more honest", "closer to the people", "knew what poor people passed through" and stuff like that.
The end result of all that is a country in deep recession with the worst corruption crisis in history, one ex-president arrested, another impeached, and one current that should be impeached, tons of politicians in jail, numerous example cases of extremely bad administrative decisions, and the general sense that the country is indeed run by ignorants, corrupt people and bad decisions.
Sure people love to talk about the SJW epidemic, all the white knighting, all the young adults behaving like spoiled brats, political correctedness, plus a bunch of other stuff. It's easy to blame institutions for behaviours like those, but more often than not, it's an age thing.
People get this skewed perception that bad things happen on campus while ignoring all the shit that happens outside of it.
So there you go. Sure, college isn't perfect. A degree isn't an indication of morals, ethics and great behaviour. And there are plenty of people who do very well without going through college. But people better be careful about sweeping generalizations, because some lines of reasoning (or lack thereof) can end up very very badly.
Been happening for a while now, which is why I went plugin agnostic with only big names not expected to sellout anytime soon.
Encryption, the best tool to detect ignorance on politicians.
We should all be using it to give politicians with stupid proposals the boot.
That really depends on where you live.
For instance, here in Brazil, in some cities, you are supposed to carry around a bit of cash...
The reason goes beyond the idea that is dangerous to carry cash around.
It's because if criminals get to you and you have no money to give away, you might end up beaten, kidnapped or even dead.
I'm not joking. There are some cities in Brazil, particularly the biggest and most densely packed, in which people understand things that way.
I have a bunch of relatives living in Sao Paulo that all say the same thing.
I'll visit them every year, but I'd never live there.
There are several things to consider here regarding your security in cases of armed robbery. Drug users could be desperate and not having cash could be pretty bad. If you only have credit cards and whatnot, criminals could take you in what's known as "flash kidnapping", taking you to ATMs to forcibly get money out at gun point. We have multiple cases like that every years. I have one relative that was involved in a traffic accident, criminals took the chance to mug him, but as he didn't have more than 10 bucks on him at the time they also decided to beat him up.
Then again, carrying too much money around all the time to places on your daily routine is a dead giveaway that you are loaded. I've seen cases time and time again of people who carried money and paid in cash everywhere getting robbed or even worse because criminals learned about their routines.
Oh, it's probably also a big reason why tourists gets mugged a lot in touristic cities around here... happens all the time in Rio de Janeiro beaches, only it's a bunch of people running around taking everything they see from tourists and beachgoers in something called "arrastao". Yes, we even have a name for it, as we have a specific word for robbery followed by assassination - "latrocinio".
These sorts of things probably happens less often in US, Canada, UK and whatnot, but hey, learn from the crappier countries' experience. xD
Without context and in isolation this will probably sound weird for most people, but what it really represents is that employers should judge job applicants only on stuff that applicants are aware of and in control.
It's a single thing that composes a set of laws on fair and equal opportunity for employment... which will probably get into a far more comprehensive set of discussions, but just so people know.
As foretold by Methus- I mean, George Carlin
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
The lawsuit is frivolous and makes absolutely no sense, but it calls attention to something way more serious.
Twitter, or a Twitter account is NOT public forum, it should never be consider public forum, and people advocating for something like this are crazy for doing so.
The very basis for something to be considered public forum is that it has to be government owned.
@realDonaldTrump not only is a personal account, it also belongs to a private service. It can't and won't be considered public forum because if that happens, the consequences of that would be far reaching and a plain nightmare.
It would automatically call for regulation and monitoring of private channels.
But it indeed calls attention on how mismanaged the current administration is. A personal account on a private service should not and cannot be used to make official governmental statements. This is not only unprofessional, it's downright irresponsible.
I know lots of people nowadays scoff at the notion of proper procedures, but there's a reason why they are in place, and it has to do not only with the proper distance that has to be kept between government and private businesses, but also with security and management.
That is to say, of course governmental branches and individuals can and should keep open line of communications in all relevant platforms, but not conduct business and use them as official channels. It's an entirely other discussion, but there you are.
I've read about this yesterday, and what came to mind is that building housing on a landfill is not the major issue there... it's the desperation part.
Of course people behind the project will try to dissuade skeptics with fancy tech buzzwords and whatnot saying they will take proper care and do it right, but the thing is that landfills are pretty much unpredictable. They are only accounting for stuff they can imagine will happen, and even so, I highly doubt they'll invest much into it.
And then, of course, when housing is desperatedly needed and these construction firms are expected to get huge profits from it, they will cut corners the first opportunity they get. This isn't charity with limitless funding, it's business.
It's cheaper for them to deal with liability later on than really spend all the money possible to make sure nothing bad will happen, because it's a game of probabilities.
Then again, people have been moving to big urban centers to live a crap live inside shoebox sized apartments all the time, closing all windows to avoid the smog, noise pollution and whatnot. Living on top of a landfill doesn't seem too far out. And I'm willing to bet that when these get available, they'll still sell for too much.
Just remember people, it's a different culture.
Japan has an aging population and very packed urban centers...
Driving classes are very strict, they have a policy about new drivers using different plates, clear identification, and not driving by themselves.
That and public transportation being very nice there.
It's a country that is anxiously waiting for autonomous cars to arrive.
Here in Brazil, elderly drivers aren't much of a problem... in fact, among all age ranges they are the ones least involved in car accidents. Age range between 30-40 are the ones involved with accidents the most.
"Separately Japanese authorities are offering elderly drivers who give up their licenses a discount on their funerals."
Dang dude.
No love for Garfield Go? http://www.garfieldgo.com/
I'm kidding of course, horrible clone.
The AR element in Pokemon Go wasn't more than novelty, and you can easily play the game without it... what made the game popular was the GPS functionality and the franchise name of course.
It is the whole problem with AR and VR. We are still missing a full step to making both convenient enough to be used without caveats. For AR, think of it integrated in regular glass frames. For VR it also needs to be some sort of regular glasses, not something that is closer to a helmet.
If we're talking about AR in smartphones, I don't think it'll ever have a directly related explosion in popularity anytime soon. You need to be constantly pointing out your camera at stuff, and this can become extremely inconvenient at times. Perhaps games with few bursts of this that have a very complex image recognition algorithm to identify objects and whatnot, but it'll still be a game that might initially explode in popularity due to novelty, but will be hard to manage a huge following for a long time.
We'll see where this goes. It's hard to imagine huge popularity because evolution of tech is dependant on overcoming some pretty big obstacles... battery is one that comes to mind. We're getting close to flexible transparent OLED displays. And perhaps wireless data high speed and low latency transmission is right around the corner too.
Are they demanding a backdoor to be build on those too?
I'm still not too sure what was the objective of the original article (on TechCrunch), but it appears to be confusing some stuff there. It appears whoever wrote it also never had any experience in online learning, which is just weird.
We already have plenty of similar platforms for education as Netflix is for entertainment. Lynda.com, Khan Academy, Coursera, EdX, Udemy, Udacity to name a few. Kinda egregious that the article talked about none of those despite them being as popular and ubiquitous as Netflix.
But what the article is really talking about is an AI powered platform that aggregates all sorts of educational information that's far more focused on specific tasks, and tools for getting in contact with real instructors and whatnot.
That's not Netflix for learning... that's basically online classes. And they exist too. They could be helped with some new tools for material aggregation, but in the end it'll need to be curated in some way, so it'll only extend what online courses are.
You don't go to Netflix to search for specific bits and pieces of entertainment... you get served a pre-selected and pre-curated range of movies. They are either missing the point or making a very bad analogy.
It's just another weird article talking about the miracles AI will supposedly make happen, but with a very shallow understanding of what it's talking about...
My schadenfreude quota has been filled with this and the Fyre festival news.
We are working less because we keep having to point out in such stories that correlation does not equal causation.
That's why,
Different but kinda similar thing, I was saying post 9/11, TSA launch, recent Patriot Act passing fear mongering that given enough room, Airlines would start forcing passengers to get a change of clothes pre-flight, absolutely no carry on allowed, then get sedated, and then pille everyone up like luggage inside planes with the excuse of it being for the security of the flight or something.
I guess this one is at least honest about the objective.
People already get extremely packed inside public transportation anyways, so this should be fine, right? Well, that is until you consider how long it takes before and after flight, how you can't exit the plane if the situation becomes too uncomfortable, how you are not running along roads but rather climbing up and going down the skies inside a metal can, how turbulence can be far more dangerous with a pack of people standing up than sitting in a comfortable position, how the last thing you want inside a plane is people panicking and running around, how dangerous scenarios like depressurization, major turbulence, and other types of problems can become catastrophic extremely fast if you have people standing...
It's quite obvious for people who fly frequently... those warning to sit down and fast the seatbelt are out of precaution, but they are there for a reason.
I mean, let this pass and we'll see how it goes. But I'm not going inside one of those, like ever. And I wouldn't invest on the airline behind this. I guarantee you that after not long, the airline would be sued to oblivion.