The story is about an increase, it's not claiming the existence of trolling. That has already been established. You can't provide examples of an increase, anything you gave would be anecdotal and thus contrary to the point of conducting a statistical analysis.
Er, what? We have essentially no laws preventing data collection. In fact, we've recently removed most of the few protections that we did have. We also have essentially no laws addressing physiological addiction other than gambling, most laws about addiction center around physically addictive substances - i.e.: Coke now has to remove the addictive chemical from cocoa leaves, so that their customers are no longer physically addicted to their product.
Which laws are you suggesting that they use in this case?
The system was made to get the smaller colonies to sign off on the constitution. It was a placating measure, there was no aspect of good governance about it, and the idea that some voters have more say than others is abhorrent to our professed democratic values.
I've only read the article you linked, but: it talks about two papers examining two different phenomena, both linked to climate change and both of which could effect oceanic currents. Also, the first quote you have there comes from the author of the article and the second quote comes from one of the authors of one of the papers. Those are quotes from different people.
Well I'm not a democrat but I'm for abortion, I like all forms of birth control. I think abortion is great.
Further, I don't see any reason why it would be a "terrible choice," and I think the idea that it could be is causing a lot of harm. It certainly is a significant choice, and one which should be considered carefully as any choice should be which will have a large long-term impact on your life. That's as far as it goes.
The summary is perhaps a little misleading, the paper says in the very next sentence that CT angiography turned up reversible cerebral vasoconstriction syndrome which can cause this kind of headache. Since capsaicin can cause arterial constriction, and this started immediately after eating the pepper, they are tentatively assuming a causal relationship.
The principle excuse trotted out for stripping away privacy protections from ISPs, was that those protections didn't apply to websites or other tech firms. So protecting peoples' privacy wasn't fair or something... I didn't really follow that argument, but I don't think that was the point. They just needed some nonsense that they could repeat over and over again until some people started to believe it.
Now we have a bill doing the opposite, I'm interested to see the argument they make in opposition to this one. Granted, since they're not overturning an existing rule they don't need to work as hard in justifying it, so they'll probably just trot out one of their old standbys. Something like: "Regulations bad! Thog smash responsible government!"
However, I would love it if they just flipped that shit around and went full doublethink on us.
Just a reminder: the word "trafficking" just means trade in illegal goods. "Sex trafficking" is prostitution. Many people confuse it for sexual slavery, in other words: human trafficking for the purpose of sex.
It's that confusion which lets them get away with anti-prostitution laws like this one, with very little push-back from the public.
If Woz if claiming that Apple isn't making it's money off of you, he is confused about how walled gardens work. Facebook collects users' data, walls it off, and sells access. Apple collects users, walls them off, and sells access.
There is a difference there, in that a person can choose to forgo anything that they've invested in Apple products and leave. Facebook allows you no such option to leave. So I'm not claiming that the two are equivalent, but you are still the product in Apple's model.
Oh for gods' sake, I said that the EFF page listed possible consequences. That was published before the law was passed, what the hell else do you expect? It's "alarmism" if they're limited to predicting the future based on past behavior? Apparently it isn't good enough unless they have a crystal ball.
"Don't use bad ISPs." is your answer? God, you really are living in a utopia. That isn't an option here.
Well you're obviously not an American, and the situation is clearly not the same everywhere as it is here, but Slashdot is frequently American-centric and this is one such instance. The summary pretty specifically mentions an American law from March of 2017 which eliminated virtually all privacy protections pertaining to ISPs, not only on what they could collect but what they could do with the data which they had collected.
Further, this is not about what they "can" do, or what they "might" do, they are doing this. In fact, back in 2013 AT&T had a program to let you opt out, for an additional cost to you of $29/month. Or you could do some reading on Verizon's program of injecting tracking data into all HTTP headers without their customers' knowledge or consent. This is not hypothetical.
Here, this is a page on some of the possible consequences of the March 2017 law, now our reality. Maybe things aren't as bad for you, but don't count on it staying that way if you maintain your apathy.
Little side note: this is why hot peppers are hot. Birds can't taste the capsaicin (though maybe "taste" isn't the right word here), so by making their fruits spicy the pepper plants can select which animals spread their seeds. Preferentially choosing birds, because they'll spread the seeds further.
NN is not about banning the prioritizing one protocol over another.
That is certainly one of the things that NN is about. Comcast was formally found in violation of net neutrality rules in 2008 for throttling a particular protocol (bit torrent).
Also, I disagree with your and the parent's conclusion that prioritization would be good for gamers. When you start talking about giving one protocol a formal blessing over another, you're choking off future innovation. This is most of the point of net neutrality, after all: yes it allows for start-ups to compete with large companies on an equal playing field, but it also allows for new technologies to compete with (and replace) old ones. This is just as applicable to gaming innovations as it is to file sharing or music / video streaming or anything else. In fact, there are games which use bit torrent to distribute patches and such, and there are a lot that integrate video streaming now. (This specific gaming innovation is not a positive one, in my opinion, but you take the bad with the good.)
people will welcome a 3 metre steel tube passing over their property
One of the selling points of the hyperloop proposal was that most of it would be built over the expressway, with the support pillars in the median strip, which would drastically simplify that problem. It was originally suggested as an alternative to the high speed rail that California is currently building, which is going to cost something like $60 billion because it can't be built over the expressway and is suffering from the issue that you're talking about.
I'm not sure which laws your referring too. Are you talking about California's labeling law? Which scares people away from some foods and towards foods labeled "organic"? You call that "lobbying against GMOs"? I call that lobbying for the sake of advertising, but whatever. I will repeat myself: there is no reason for Whole Foods to lobby against this decision.
(California's labeling law is not idiotic, but that's another topic.)
For most of the information gathers it is used to benefit us.
You're going to have to be more specific here. I'm sure that there are specific applications like this, but the majority of the information collected commercially is used for advertising and market research, and the majority of information collected by the government is used for law enforcement.
Certainly law enforcement does benefit us in general, but being spied upon by law enforcement does not benefit you. You only benefit when other people get spied upon. And that's assuming honest, trustworthy spies.
We're talking about Macs here. The only heavy duty work that Apple really supports on Macs is graphic design / video editing.
Apple has been moving their Mac line away from being multifuntion computers and towards being locked-down devices for years now. This is just one more step in that direction. As long as they get Adobe on board with this, they'll retain almost all of their business customers.
Well that does seem to be applicable. One of those articles does say that, "the Court tempered its holding noting that: [i]ts ruling should not be read to require litigants in all cases to preserve and produce electronically stored information that is temporarily stored only in RAM." but it's hard to believe that that case and this one are qualitatively different.
Yes, they're different, but unless Whole Foods were lobbying against this I don't see how it would effect how a Republican administration would act. Since this will only give Whole Foods more business, I wouldn't expect them to be protesting it too hard.
It allows for changes which can't be achieved through breeding. For the most part that fact is good, but it certainly does pose a degree of danger. I have defended GMO foods in the past as being safe, but that was under the premise that they were carefully monitored. This is just... nuts.
Courts can't compel Cloudflare to collect information, they can only compel them to turn over the information which they already have. Cloudflare says:
While we need some logging to prevent abuse and debug issues, we couldn't imagine any situation where we'd need that information longer than 24 hours. And we wanted to put our money where our mouth was, so we committed to retaining KPMG, the well-respected auditing firm, to audit our code and practices annually and publish a public report confirming we're doing what we said we would.
In the end you're still probably better off using the DNS that your VPN provides, but this seems like a good alternative to 8.8.8.8.
If there were enough non-luminous planets in the Galaxy to outweigh all the visible matter by a factor of five, we'd notice it.
This is not true, these things are basically invisible to us - until recently it was believed that brown dwarves were way more common than they now appear to be, but it is none the less true that baryonic dark matter can not account for all (or even a large portion) of the dark matter in the universe. That's why I said above that known types of matter can't account for all, or even most, of dark matter.
Slashdot Mirror
The story is about an increase, it's not claiming the existence of trolling. That has already been established. You can't provide examples of an increase, anything you gave would be anecdotal and thus contrary to the point of conducting a statistical analysis.
Er, what? We have essentially no laws preventing data collection. In fact, we've recently removed most of the few protections that we did have. We also have essentially no laws addressing physiological addiction other than gambling, most laws about addiction center around physically addictive substances - i.e.: Coke now has to remove the addictive chemical from cocoa leaves, so that their customers are no longer physically addicted to their product.
Which laws are you suggesting that they use in this case?
The system was made to get the smaller colonies to sign off on the constitution. It was a placating measure, there was no aspect of good governance about it, and the idea that some voters have more say than others is abhorrent to our professed democratic values.
I've only read the article you linked, but: it talks about two papers examining two different phenomena, both linked to climate change and both of which could effect oceanic currents. Also, the first quote you have there comes from the author of the article and the second quote comes from one of the authors of one of the papers. Those are quotes from different people.
Well I'm not a democrat but I'm for abortion, I like all forms of birth control. I think abortion is great.
Further, I don't see any reason why it would be a "terrible choice," and I think the idea that it could be is causing a lot of harm. It certainly is a significant choice, and one which should be considered carefully as any choice should be which will have a large long-term impact on your life. That's as far as it goes.
The summary is perhaps a little misleading, the paper says in the very next sentence that CT angiography turned up reversible cerebral vasoconstriction syndrome which can cause this kind of headache. Since capsaicin can cause arterial constriction, and this started immediately after eating the pepper, they are tentatively assuming a causal relationship.
The principle excuse trotted out for stripping away privacy protections from ISPs, was that those protections didn't apply to websites or other tech firms. So protecting peoples' privacy wasn't fair or something... I didn't really follow that argument, but I don't think that was the point. They just needed some nonsense that they could repeat over and over again until some people started to believe it.
Now we have a bill doing the opposite, I'm interested to see the argument they make in opposition to this one. Granted, since they're not overturning an existing rule they don't need to work as hard in justifying it, so they'll probably just trot out one of their old standbys. Something like: "Regulations bad! Thog smash responsible government!"
However, I would love it if they just flipped that shit around and went full doublethink on us.
Just a reminder: the word "trafficking" just means trade in illegal goods. "Sex trafficking" is prostitution. Many people confuse it for sexual slavery, in other words: human trafficking for the purpose of sex.
It's that confusion which lets them get away with anti-prostitution laws like this one, with very little push-back from the public.
If Woz if claiming that Apple isn't making it's money off of you, he is confused about how walled gardens work. Facebook collects users' data, walls it off, and sells access. Apple collects users, walls them off, and sells access.
There is a difference there, in that a person can choose to forgo anything that they've invested in Apple products and leave. Facebook allows you no such option to leave. So I'm not claiming that the two are equivalent, but you are still the product in Apple's model.
Oh for gods' sake, I said that the EFF page listed possible consequences. That was published before the law was passed, what the hell else do you expect? It's "alarmism" if they're limited to predicting the future based on past behavior? Apparently it isn't good enough unless they have a crystal ball.
"Don't use bad ISPs." is your answer? God, you really are living in a utopia. That isn't an option here.
Well you're obviously not an American, and the situation is clearly not the same everywhere as it is here, but Slashdot is frequently American-centric and this is one such instance. The summary pretty specifically mentions an American law from March of 2017 which eliminated virtually all privacy protections pertaining to ISPs, not only on what they could collect but what they could do with the data which they had collected.
Further, this is not about what they "can" do, or what they "might" do, they are doing this. In fact, back in 2013 AT&T had a program to let you opt out, for an additional cost to you of $29/month. Or you could do some reading on Verizon's program of injecting tracking data into all HTTP headers without their customers' knowledge or consent. This is not hypothetical.
Here, this is a page on some of the possible consequences of the March 2017 law, now our reality. Maybe things aren't as bad for you, but don't count on it staying that way if you maintain your apathy.
Little side note: this is why hot peppers are hot. Birds can't taste the capsaicin (though maybe "taste" isn't the right word here), so by making their fruits spicy the pepper plants can select which animals spread their seeds. Preferentially choosing birds, because they'll spread the seeds further.
NN is not about banning the prioritizing one protocol over another.
That is certainly one of the things that NN is about. Comcast was formally found in violation of net neutrality rules in 2008 for throttling a particular protocol (bit torrent).
Also, I disagree with your and the parent's conclusion that prioritization would be good for gamers. When you start talking about giving one protocol a formal blessing over another, you're choking off future innovation. This is most of the point of net neutrality, after all: yes it allows for start-ups to compete with large companies on an equal playing field, but it also allows for new technologies to compete with (and replace) old ones. This is just as applicable to gaming innovations as it is to file sharing or music / video streaming or anything else. In fact, there are games which use bit torrent to distribute patches and such, and there are a lot that integrate video streaming now. (This specific gaming innovation is not a positive one, in my opinion, but you take the bad with the good.)
people will welcome a 3 metre steel tube passing over their property
One of the selling points of the hyperloop proposal was that most of it would be built over the expressway, with the support pillars in the median strip, which would drastically simplify that problem. It was originally suggested as an alternative to the high speed rail that California is currently building, which is going to cost something like $60 billion because it can't be built over the expressway and is suffering from the issue that you're talking about.
I'm not sure which laws your referring too. Are you talking about California's labeling law? Which scares people away from some foods and towards foods labeled "organic"? You call that "lobbying against GMOs"? I call that lobbying for the sake of advertising, but whatever. I will repeat myself: there is no reason for Whole Foods to lobby against this decision.
(California's labeling law is not idiotic, but that's another topic.)
For most of the information gathers it is used to benefit us.
You're going to have to be more specific here. I'm sure that there are specific applications like this, but the majority of the information collected commercially is used for advertising and market research, and the majority of information collected by the government is used for law enforcement.
Certainly law enforcement does benefit us in general, but being spied upon by law enforcement does not benefit you. You only benefit when other people get spied upon. And that's assuming honest, trustworthy spies.
We're talking about Macs here. The only heavy duty work that Apple really supports on Macs is graphic design / video editing.
Apple has been moving their Mac line away from being multifuntion computers and towards being locked-down devices for years now. This is just one more step in that direction. As long as they get Adobe on board with this, they'll retain almost all of their business customers.
Well that does seem to be applicable. One of those articles does say that, "the Court tempered its holding noting that: [i]ts ruling should not be read to require litigants in all cases to preserve and produce electronically stored information that is temporarily stored only in RAM." but it's hard to believe that that case and this one are qualitatively different.
Yes, they're different, but unless Whole Foods were lobbying against this I don't see how it would effect how a Republican administration would act. Since this will only give Whole Foods more business, I wouldn't expect them to be protesting it too hard.
There's nothing weird about this, GMOs are backed by very large companies. Ultimately, that's all that matters.
It allows for changes which can't be achieved through breeding. For the most part that fact is good, but it certainly does pose a degree of danger. I have defended GMO foods in the past as being safe, but that was under the premise that they were carefully monitored. This is just... nuts.
While we need some logging to prevent abuse and debug issues, we couldn't imagine any situation where we'd need that information longer than 24 hours. And we wanted to put our money where our mouth was, so we committed to retaining KPMG, the well-respected auditing firm, to audit our code and practices annually and publish a public report confirming we're doing what we said we would.
In the end you're still probably better off using the DNS that your VPN provides, but this seems like a good alternative to 8.8.8.8.
"A few" ... ::sigh:: It's 17% of Christians in the United States, according to a poll that Time Magazine did in 2006.
If there were enough non-luminous planets in the Galaxy to outweigh all the visible matter by a factor of five, we'd notice it.
This is not true, these things are basically invisible to us - until recently it was believed that brown dwarves were way more common than they now appear to be, but it is none the less true that baryonic dark matter can not account for all (or even a large portion) of the dark matter in the universe. That's why I said above that known types of matter can't account for all, or even most, of dark matter.
No, we don't know how to detect matter like that. We've only just recently been able to detect some nearby non-luminous planets. Here.