Absolutely! They have to. If this is an asset (which this data most certainly is) they it must be auctioned off to pay off debt. At this point the data is just like a chair they own in the office.
By the way, it will be the highest bidder, so if it's 50% off that after they marked it up 100%!!
Ok, so you fired a person who was abusing his power of position at a company. Why is this a story? It's not. It's only floated out there by Facebook to "show" they are doing something. This will not be tolerated!! See?!? We care here at Facebook!!
The post by Karmashock is a much bigger view on this issue. It isn't about one person getting a warning, it's how the "insert law/act/rule here" is being used.
If this is really just a warning and no big deal, why are we even reading about it. Someone will get a "don't do that again", and they will say "sorry, my bad" and move on. Maybe even something happens to him, who knows.
The issue becomes when this is used to gain power. If this power is wielded in a way that seems "one sided" then the instability in introduced into the system. There is a breaking point where the system will fail.
Our government (system) is still very young and still can easily fall due to the corrupt. And unfortunately there is no shortage of the corrupt.
Whether you're for or against how the Net Neutrality rules by the FCC were implemented, what is the point of backing this "role back". Let's be practical, it isn't going to pass. The only moment of victory might be passing the senate. It will never pass the house, and will get a veto from the president.
Is this just being hurt cause one administration passed some rules and now the next one is clearing them out? Are these rules just being cleared out to spite the last administration.
Yes, there is big money at stake, but let's get real and do something positive. Do something the last administration didn't do. Make a law. Instead of putting all this effort into something that will go nowhere, put the effort into something lasting. Yes, that will mean working with both side. This will usually have a better outcome. It will keep it balanced.
All these "protest" are like pissing in the wind. It feels good for a second, then it's just cold and damp.
Give me a break. This is all about the ad money for Google. It might be easier to give directions if you're writing it down, but you have a map with the roads on it and it's speaking to you. How more dummy down do you need?
Next it will be: Turn right at the Burger King, Home of the Wopper, 2 for 6$!!
You've made some major "assumptions" and declared a number of economic issues as well known. If being poor was only economical, then all of what you said would work. Unfortunately, this is looking at the problem in a vacuum. If simply giving everyone money would bring people up economically, we would have already succeeded by now.
For example, there are a lot of people who don't have a huge drive to better themselves. They just want to live how they are. Nothing wrong with it, just as you find you're motivated to look at a big picture on economic issues.
No homelessness? Are you kidding? Many people actually choose this style of living. I've talked with them. Some of these people were like you and me and just gave the birdie to society and left it. They don't want it. Giving them money.... not going to change what they want.
I won't even go into the drug issues of these homeless people. Unfortunately, they are probably homeless because of this. But, unless they want to get help, unless they really want to beat it, no amount of money will save them. They will find the drugs again. Big social issue. Someone needs to really care for the person, not give them money.
"People will have to work fewer hours to take home only a moderate amount of additional wealth instead of an enormous and unmanageable amount." I'm not sure where to begin with how wrong this statement is. So, who will decide what is moderate and unmanageable? Let people decide how much they work and how much they want to make. This is really what drives people. Is it all about the money. No, but let people decide that.
I think you have a very clear thought process. I also think you've simplified problems too much, and don't account for many problems you would create by your economic utopia.
How about this: Force him to answer the same number of robo calls he's made. Then he can know how fun it is to be interrupted during dinner, working, etc. and I'm sure it's not that big of a deal since he will hang up real quick.
Are these employee's now just moving? How many years have they been working there and just now realize how FB uses personal data? Is it they didn't mind how the data was used if they believed in the ends it was used for?
All of this could be true, but in the end they are looking out for number 1: Themselves. If you've worked in the Tech sector, you can see the end coming. The rats start abandoning ship first, or employees if you will. This is also a smart move as the company will put the blame on the employee soon enough. So get out while you can.
So FB employees leaving because of ethics? Sounds like leaving is actually showing what their ethics is: Me first!!
This will be an interesting situation. I've worked in networking for more years than I would like to say. And the mantra is: The network is broken. There is a number of reasons this connection could have had an issue and it has nothing to do with blocking traffic. DNS services, multiple routes converging, new hard installed, there is a number links in this chain. I just want to see now how many times this will come up. What will an ISP have to do to "prove" there is no blocking? Would you trust what they say anyway? Maybe a new (or old) engineer just pulled off a stupid, cause that never happens. Looks like some serious finger pointing and maybe some finger wagging. Maybe some always lawyer enriching class action lawsuits!! The possibilities are endless.
Sooooo, I'm not defending Comcast or whatever ISP will be put in the spotlight, but the internet is a big place and ISPs don't own all the services out there to get from a home connection to a single website.
If I was on this campus and found out they were tracking me, I would swipe the hell out of my card in all sorts of places just to do it. Walk by the library, swipe the badge. Go by a common area, swipe again. Get a group together and have a session. Run a contest to see how many swipes you can get!
Student have time on their hands and they can get some interesting ideas on how to have fun and screw with people.
I had to think about this for a while, but it all points back to Apple wanting to sell phones. After I've had my phone for say 3 years why can't I try and fix it? It's not a warranty problem, that's expired. Important point is the phone is mine, not the selling company. I throw the BS flag on the idea it's to keep the integrity of their product. I know, it would be better for me to walk around with a cracked screen on my phone, cause that's great advertisement. Buy this phone, it breaks. And lastly as a couple of people have commented, there is usually multiple detailed youtube videos available on exactly how to do it.
Personally I'm sick of people telling me what do to with my stuff. I'm curious by nature and I've fixed a lot of broken stuff. It's what drive a number of us nerd types. Can I fix this, or better yet, how can I make this better.
Another issue with heat pumps as soon as the outside temp heads to near freezing they are useless. That's when they switch over to the backup electric elements and really suck the power.
I live in the US, particularly Washington state, where most of our electricity is derived from hydro. It's used because it's readily available but it does have its side effects. Just like where I live solar is used with a diminished effect. (I live on the western side of the state with tall trees and cloud cover) If I lived in Arizona, I could bank a very good output of solar, but not so much on the hydro. Shouldn't this be the way we look at our energy? A combination of all power types would be good in the correct situations. Not all areas are blessed with natural resources to be 100% renewable.
Airlines are there to make profit, so if how they board the plane meet the best profits, then they will do it. If by saving time would make more money, which it should, then the airlines will do it. It's about what makes the most money. Now if you're willing to pay more to board sooner, I'm sure the airlines will take you money.
As the wise song says:
It's all about the money, money money!!
and if we at the airlines can make you happy along the way, great!
Should the auto manufacturers work on getting real security into their vehicles before we install auto braking or anything that adjusts the car for you?
I guess I'm putting more of a question out to readers who understand this. So 22 state AGs are going to sue the FCC because they can't 'arbitrary and capricious changes to existing policies and misinterpreted and disregarded "critical record evidence on industry practices and harm to consumers and businesses'.
Ok, so what will this do? Is there a way this will do anything beside a "dog and pony show"? Is this just political posturing or can the AGs tell the FCC what to do?
Personally, in all of these discussions I would like people to define what NN is to them and how they understand it. I live in Washington and I know our state governor is budgeting for a speed test website to support NN. Is this what people in leadership think NN is? What about you?
The stadium offer referred to was the Chris Hansen/SODO district deal and wouldn't not have cost a single dime of public money. Hopefully you know what SODO is, because without the other 2 stadiums (CenturyLink and Safco Field) down there it would be a total dump.
If you have ~40,000 employees, laying off hundreds seems like the normal hiring process. People come and go. Also, if you want to get rid of business groups who under perform or are not the focus of the business anymore, you remove those jobs. Then hire in other areas. Common practice in large organizations. Not sure how this really is a story. I'm not even touching on the seasonal aspect of their business.
On the other hand, if they were laying off say 10% of peeps in Seattle, then you have a story.
Even if the 51st vote is found, then it heads to the House where it will most likely die. If by some miracle the house passes it, it will go to President Trump and he will surely veto it.
So I guess everyone involved can feel good they did something, but I can't see how this will change the decision on NN.
Wow talk about calling the kettle black. The US government wants to look at the FCC for fraudulent claims. Doesn't matter which side of the fence you stand on, you have to admit it's funny.
Instead of "Wake up" I would suggest to "Broaden your vision"
This is a classic. So what if the ozone layer is completely destroyed? And if the fish are all dead. Or lots of species are extinct. Watersheds, etc. How does this "threaten" a huge rock revolving a small/medium star?
There will be other critters species that will thrive in other types of environments. For some reason we say our planet is threatened because plants, animals, and even humans are having a harder time living on it or perhaps becoming extinct. The planet isn't threaten, we are.
Again, this globe will continue to spin long after our exit.
Slashdot Mirror
Absolutely! They have to. If this is an asset (which this data most certainly is) they it must be auctioned off to pay off debt. At this point the data is just like a chair they own in the office.
By the way, it will be the highest bidder, so if it's 50% off that after they marked it up 100%!!
Ok, so you fired a person who was abusing his power of position at a company. Why is this a story? It's not. It's only floated out there by Facebook to "show" they are doing something. This will not be tolerated!! See?!? We care here at Facebook!!
The post by Karmashock is a much bigger view on this issue. It isn't about one person getting a warning, it's how the "insert law/act/rule here" is being used.
If this is really just a warning and no big deal, why are we even reading about it. Someone will get a "don't do that again", and they will say "sorry, my bad" and move on. Maybe even something happens to him, who knows.
The issue becomes when this is used to gain power. If this power is wielded in a way that seems "one sided" then the instability in introduced into the system. There is a breaking point where the system will fail.
Our government (system) is still very young and still can easily fall due to the corrupt. And unfortunately there is no shortage of the corrupt.
Whether you're for or against how the Net Neutrality rules by the FCC were implemented, what is the point of backing this "role back". Let's be practical, it isn't going to pass. The only moment of victory might be passing the senate. It will never pass the house, and will get a veto from the president.
Is this just being hurt cause one administration passed some rules and now the next one is clearing them out? Are these rules just being cleared out to spite the last administration.
Yes, there is big money at stake, but let's get real and do something positive. Do something the last administration didn't do. Make a law. Instead of putting all this effort into something that will go nowhere, put the effort into something lasting. Yes, that will mean working with both side. This will usually have a better outcome. It will keep it balanced.
All these "protest" are like pissing in the wind. It feels good for a second, then it's just cold and damp.
Good Job.
Give me a break. This is all about the ad money for Google. It might be easier to give directions if you're writing it down, but you have a map with the roads on it and it's speaking to you. How more dummy down do you need?
Next it will be:
Turn right at the Burger King, Home of the Wopper, 2 for 6$!!
Money.
You've made some major "assumptions" and declared a number of economic issues as well known. If being poor was only economical, then all of what you said would work. Unfortunately, this is looking at the problem in a vacuum. If simply giving everyone money would bring people up economically, we would have already succeeded by now.
For example, there are a lot of people who don't have a huge drive to better themselves. They just want to live how they are. Nothing wrong with it, just as you find you're motivated to look at a big picture on economic issues.
No homelessness? Are you kidding? Many people actually choose this style of living. I've talked with them. Some of these people were like you and me and just gave the birdie to society and left it. They don't want it. Giving them money.... not going to change what they want.
I won't even go into the drug issues of these homeless people. Unfortunately, they are probably homeless because of this. But, unless they want to get help, unless they really want to beat it, no amount of money will save them. They will find the drugs again. Big social issue. Someone needs to really care for the person, not give them money.
"People will have to work fewer hours to take home only a moderate amount of additional wealth instead of an enormous and unmanageable amount." I'm not sure where to begin with how wrong this statement is. So, who will decide what is moderate and unmanageable? Let people decide how much they work and how much they want to make. This is really what drives people. Is it all about the money. No, but let people decide that.
I think you have a very clear thought process. I also think you've simplified problems too much, and don't account for many problems you would create by your economic utopia.
How about this: Force him to answer the same number of robo calls he's made. Then he can know how fun it is to be interrupted during dinner, working, etc. and I'm sure it's not that big of a deal since he will hang up real quick.
The odds of a young person knowing what a check is and how to use it is low.
The next response is what is a money order?
Are these employee's now just moving? How many years have they been working there and just now realize how FB uses personal data? Is it they didn't mind how the data was used if they believed in the ends it was used for?
All of this could be true, but in the end they are looking out for number 1: Themselves. If you've worked in the Tech sector, you can see the end coming. The rats start abandoning ship first, or employees if you will. This is also a smart move as the company will put the blame on the employee soon enough. So get out while you can.
So FB employees leaving because of ethics? Sounds like leaving is actually showing what their ethics is: Me first!!
Who on earth would want to have a Facebook enabled "anything" in their home?
Exactly.
Sir, that will cost you 5 Googs. Sorry we don't advertise for the competition, I mean the bad cryptocurrency. You can trust Google...
This will be an interesting situation. I've worked in networking for more years than I would like to say. And the mantra is: The network is broken. There is a number of reasons this connection could have had an issue and it has nothing to do with blocking traffic. DNS services, multiple routes converging, new hard installed, there is a number links in this chain. I just want to see now how many times this will come up. What will an ISP have to do to "prove" there is no blocking? Would you trust what they say anyway? Maybe a new (or old) engineer just pulled off a stupid, cause that never happens. Looks like some serious finger pointing and maybe some finger wagging. Maybe some always lawyer enriching class action lawsuits!! The possibilities are endless.
Sooooo, I'm not defending Comcast or whatever ISP will be put in the spotlight, but the internet is a big place and ISPs don't own all the services out there to get from a home connection to a single website.
If I was on this campus and found out they were tracking me, I would swipe the hell out of my card in all sorts of places just to do it. Walk by the library, swipe the badge. Go by a common area, swipe again. Get a group together and have a session. Run a contest to see how many swipes you can get!
Student have time on their hands and they can get some interesting ideas on how to have fun and screw with people.
I had to think about this for a while, but it all points back to Apple wanting to sell phones. After I've had my phone for say 3 years why can't I try and fix it? It's not a warranty problem, that's expired. Important point is the phone is mine, not the selling company. I throw the BS flag on the idea it's to keep the integrity of their product. I know, it would be better for me to walk around with a cracked screen on my phone, cause that's great advertisement. Buy this phone, it breaks. And lastly as a couple of people have commented, there is usually multiple detailed youtube videos available on exactly how to do it.
Personally I'm sick of people telling me what do to with my stuff. I'm curious by nature and I've fixed a lot of broken stuff. It's what drive a number of us nerd types. Can I fix this, or better yet, how can I make this better.
This just seems to be all about the money.
Another issue with heat pumps as soon as the outside temp heads to near freezing they are useless. That's when they switch over to the backup electric elements and really suck the power.
I live in the US, particularly Washington state, where most of our electricity is derived from hydro. It's used because it's readily available but it does have its side effects. Just like where I live solar is used with a diminished effect. (I live on the western side of the state with tall trees and cloud cover) If I lived in Arizona, I could bank a very good output of solar, but not so much on the hydro. Shouldn't this be the way we look at our energy? A combination of all power types would be good in the correct situations. Not all areas are blessed with natural resources to be 100% renewable.
Airlines are there to make profit, so if how they board the plane meet the best profits, then they will do it. If by saving time would make more money, which it should, then the airlines will do it. It's about what makes the most money. Now if you're willing to pay more to board sooner, I'm sure the airlines will take you money.
As the wise song says:
It's all about the money, money money!!
and if we at the airlines can make you happy along the way, great!
Should the auto manufacturers work on getting real security into their vehicles before we install auto braking or anything that adjusts the car for you?
I guess I'm putting more of a question out to readers who understand this. So 22 state AGs are going to sue the FCC because they can't 'arbitrary and capricious changes to existing policies and misinterpreted and disregarded "critical record evidence on industry practices and harm to consumers and businesses'.
Ok, so what will this do? Is there a way this will do anything beside a "dog and pony show"? Is this just political posturing or can the AGs tell the FCC what to do?
Personally, in all of these discussions I would like people to define what NN is to them and how they understand it. I live in Washington and I know our state governor is budgeting for a speed test website to support NN. Is this what people in leadership think NN is? What about you?
The stadium offer referred to was the Chris Hansen/SODO district deal and wouldn't not have cost a single dime of public money. Hopefully you know what SODO is, because without the other 2 stadiums (CenturyLink and Safco Field) down there it would be a total dump.
If you have ~40,000 employees, laying off hundreds seems like the normal hiring process. People come and go. Also, if you want to get rid of business groups who under perform or are not the focus of the business anymore, you remove those jobs. Then hire in other areas. Common practice in large organizations. Not sure how this really is a story. I'm not even touching on the seasonal aspect of their business.
On the other hand, if they were laying off say 10% of peeps in Seattle, then you have a story.
Even if the 51st vote is found, then it heads to the House where it will most likely die. If by some miracle the house passes it, it will go to President Trump and he will surely veto it.
So I guess everyone involved can feel good they did something, but I can't see how this will change the decision on NN.
Wow talk about calling the kettle black. The US government wants to look at the FCC for fraudulent claims. Doesn't matter which side of the fence you stand on, you have to admit it's funny.
Instead of "Wake up" I would suggest to "Broaden your vision" This is a classic. So what if the ozone layer is completely destroyed? And if the fish are all dead. Or lots of species are extinct. Watersheds, etc. How does this "threaten" a huge rock revolving a small/medium star? There will be other critters species that will thrive in other types of environments. For some reason we say our planet is threatened because plants, animals, and even humans are having a harder time living on it or perhaps becoming extinct. The planet isn't threaten, we are. Again, this globe will continue to spin long after our exit.