I delivered packages for UPS last Christmas season. And no, you do not always get discretion. Your board tells you whether you get discretion, or not.
Alcohol and wine deliveries require signatures. Deliveries to businesses require signatures (since they're supposedly open when we delivered to them, there is bound to be someone there to sign). Some bad neighborhoods require signatures. And yes, sometimes it's the shipper that requires a signature, for instance Best Buy always requires a signature (no matter how cheap the item is, or how good the neighborhood is, which is completely asinine).
In the case of the Amazon employee, I'll bet that he simply lived in a bad neighborhood, or a very large apartment building with no obvious safe place to leave the packages. In which case, this will get solved with the new pick up areas Amazon is setting up at liquor stores, supermarkets, and gas stations opened 24/7, or open very late.
As to Amazon, note that Amazon is only picking up the most lucrative part of the shipping business with its "Amazon Instant" and its "Amazon Fresh". It's focusing on instant deliveries, which even FedEx doesn't do (let alone UPS). This is the same way FedEx got started when UPS was already around, it focused on overnight deliveries since they could charge exponentially more for items that would get shipped overnight.
And by focusing on instant deliveries, Amazon can acquire impulse buyers that would normally go to brick and mortar stores to get their fix.
Am I the only one who thought that the $100,000 bill was this bill and that the boy had earned a bug hunting/spell-checking bounty from Google for having caught the mistake?
Except in the past those exclusive features usually had a reason behind them. Like the hardware didn't support the feature.
No, it was the same thing with the Nexus line as well.
Take the action bar library for instance. When it first came on the scene, it wasn't backwards compatible. The community created its own library for backwards-compatibility. Eventually, Google supported an official version of the backwards compatibility library and the community version was discontinued. There are dozens of other examples like this.
First Google comes up with a new feature, which it implements on the latest hardware and on its latest flagship device. Then later, the real work begins, both the open source community and Google try to bake an adaptation of that new feature into a compatibility library (that hopefully won't run like a dog on the older hardware).
Being forced to upgrade to something which in every other country in the world has caused a significant drop in credit card fraud is a damn good thing, not a sueable offence.
The new chip system in the US works differently than the chip system in Europe, so no, the US isn't being forced to adopt what the rest of the world is already using.
For instance, in France I can use a European chip card in a restaurant in the middle of nowhere where there is no cell phone reception (or no landlines), and the transaction gets reconciled later when the transactions get uploaded. In the US, under the new system, no one is allowed to keep the data around for later reconciliation, even in an encrypted form, so that means that the multitudes of authentication handshakes must occur correctly before the transactions get authorised (even if the amounts in question are tiny).
This is why using smartcards in Europe takes no time at all to get authorized, they're actually faster than magnetic debit/credit cards. But this is also why the current smartcards in US (when used through the chip) are so slow, although in theory they're supposed to be more secure than the European smartcards.
In most jurisdictions, you need special permits and/or plate and/or insurance and/or background check and/or to pay taxes when you offer taxi service, which is exactly what Uber drivers are doing.
Yes, they do go through some background checks, although it's usually not as thorough as some of the taxi cab drivers have to go through, they carry commercial insurance, and they do pay special taxes to some of the cities and airports they service.
That being said, Uber cars are more like limousines, black-for-hire cars, or airport shuttles, not taxis, they're not allowed to pick up people who flag them on the streets, nor do they have special taxi stands that they can wait at, but they're allowed to pick passengers up if the service was pre-arranged by telephone just like a limousine driver would be allowed to do.
Yes, "ride-hailing" doesn't work. Also, hailing implies the visual flagging down of the Uber car on the street, which Uber drivers are not allowed to respond to.
A more accurate label is ride-sharing. After all, taxi cabs do not pick up different people who do not know each other at different points on a route to share part of their journey. That is more like airport shuttles, or buses, except unlike airport shuttles or buses, Uber/Lyft does the matching of riders in real-time.
That will mean violating the customer's trust — if I am sorting by rankings, the site will be lying to me if they let (alleged) bigotry weight somebody down beyond the low rating the alleging party has left.
Uber already does that to a degree. If you ignore three requests in a row for pickups, the driver is kicked offline for 30 minutes (in some areas).
The same thing could be done with AirBnB. It doesn't matter if the AirBnB owner is racist, or just unavailable. And it's too difficult to tell anyway. It's just that if the owner of an AirBnB is too unresponsive to some of his/her potential customers, AirBnB should just place that specific AirBnB at the back of the queue for a couple of days.
First off, I would never rent my house for a week or two. I just don't trust people that much.
Renting your own house is one thing. All your stuff is in there. But if you had a duplex for instance or a second apartment, that might be a different story. In my area, the riskier tenants are the ones that stay for more than 30 days, because then rent control and renters rights go into effect, and it becomes almost impossible to evict them (even if they decide to stop paying rent).
Second, if I was going to rent my house out for a week or two I would look at age first. That 50-year-old black couple is going to beat the 20-year-old single white dude. Every. Single. Time.
Does Airbnb give you their age? And what about the parent who gets an Airbnb for his/her 20 years old son? Are you allowed to refuse someone because their parents booked the room for them? I am sure you wouldn't know, but I assume that someone else reading this may know the answer.
Exactly. He chose his name as a "brand", he trademarked that name/brand, he sold that name/brand. He received large sums of money so others could exclusively use that name/brand. If he wants that name/brand he can buy it, just like the people he sold it to.
Actually, he may have a case.
Intel did rename MacAffee Security to Intel Security.
The phrase "use it or lose it," while cliché, aptly describes the underlying principles for obtaining and maintaining trademark rights in the United States. Use, not registration, matters most in the United States. See article.
And it's not like Intel doesn't have lawyers on staff.
The driver will not be able to reactivate the Autopilot until the car is stopped and put in 'Park.'
That's a really bad idea. If they really want to punish them, they should use a timer instead.
A few years ago, a friend drove a Prius and the GPS navigation input function didn't work unless she went less than 5 miles an hour, so what my friend ended up doing was slowing down at the most inappropriate places on freeways and highways just so she could use the built-in navigation.
No doubt, frustrated Tesla drivers will just start parking their car in the middle of the roads just so they can re-engage their auto-pilot. That's what happens when one tries to use technology to control human beings. Those human beings start rebelling and start acting like even bigger idiots, possibly causing even more accidents. Also, I suspect that many Tesla owners will just try to disable/postpone this last update for as long as they can.
An MRI machine needs 1,700 litres of liquid helium, which needs to be topped off regularly. That's the equivalent of 12,724 cubic meters. The airship needs 38,000 cubic meters of helium, which I assume also needs to be topped off regularly.
In other words, the airship uses Helium at the rate of three MRI machines (according to my layman calculation). I'm not making a judgement one way or another. I just wanted to quantify the comparison.
What happens when someone asks for a judge to recuse themselves because the litigation value tripled when the judge got assigned? It's a lot harder to defend the integrity of the system when supposedly impartial actors have quantifiable effects.
Lawyers, the media, and insurance companies already do try to quantify the rulings of judges.
It's not like this is anything new. Plus, it's not like these reports will be posted online for free. Some parts will, to gain attention and get publicity, but most of these won't since obviously the founder is trying to a make commercial product out of it since he's using YCombinator funding.
This again? You haven't been paying attention. Sweden did illegally rendition two Egyptians to the United States. Also, the Swedish government admitted as much that its previous government had authorized a US black plane to pick up Julian Assange once he'd get extradited back to Sweden.
I don't see how that's relevant. If Google antagonizes some of the carriers, that will just fragment the mobile space even more, because those carriers will just find a different OS that allows them to install whatever crapware they want on it (for instance: Tizen, CyanogenMod, Windows Phone, etc.).
No, that's not quite a duress password. That's girlfriend #1 password, or that's girlfriend #2 password. Each password just logs into a different account (but it does it quickly and seamlessly so that the person doesn't know they're login in to a different account). For instance, you could have a picture of your girlfriend #1 as the wallpaper when you unlock your phone with your first password. The email app would lead to one particular email client that girlfriend #2 doesn't know about. The gallery would only contain pictures of girlfriend #1, but not #2. The text app would only contain texts that you sent to girlfriend #1. Etc.
it could potentially be configured to disregard entry attempts if your attempt to access was not sincere
That problem is already solved.
My old Android LG G2 for instance allows me to login under a different profile based on the particular pattern/password I am using. This is handy if you have multiple girlfriends (not that I even have one yet, but I am speaking hypothetically, so let's say I do get one girlfriend, and then a second one). If they see your password/pattern, they're under the illusion that it is your main password, so they can snoop all they want using that same password, and the system doesn't give them a clue that they're in a particular profile.
Of course, you can disable apps and functionality for each particular profile you have on that phone, and that part can be handy if you're loaning your phone to a kid, or to a perfect stranger, but then of course, it may become obvious that they're using a crippled profile if too much standard functionality is missing from it.
And for your laptop, you just need to carry around a Linux laptop, or a Chromebook. What are they going to do? Fine you for not having access to all the accounts on your machine? Or fine you for using your Chromebook in Incognito mode?
As to the traces of cocaine, I don't think that's fair. Almost all US currency has traces of cocaine on it and I assume it's the same with Canadian currency. And if he carried cash in his bag, then obviously their spectrometer is going to find traces of cocaine in it. It would be weird if they didn't.
As to the $5,000 cash (whether it's US dollars or Canadian dollars), I don't see why that's even relevant. It's well under the legal limit and a drug mule would probably carry 50+ times that amount anyway. What do the Canadian authorities want anyway? If they tell their Canadian citizens not to carry cash when crossing the US border, US border officials will find that suspicious and may turn them around back to Canada. It's going to be damned if you do, or damned if you don't.
Slashdot Mirror
I delivered packages for UPS last Christmas season. And no, you do not always get discretion. Your board tells you whether you get discretion, or not.
Alcohol and wine deliveries require signatures. Deliveries to businesses require signatures (since they're supposedly open when we delivered to them, there is bound to be someone there to sign). Some bad neighborhoods require signatures. And yes, sometimes it's the shipper that requires a signature, for instance Best Buy always requires a signature (no matter how cheap the item is, or how good the neighborhood is, which is completely asinine).
In the case of the Amazon employee, I'll bet that he simply lived in a bad neighborhood, or a very large apartment building with no obvious safe place to leave the packages. In which case, this will get solved with the new pick up areas Amazon is setting up at liquor stores, supermarkets, and gas stations opened 24/7, or open very late.
As to Amazon, note that Amazon is only picking up the most lucrative part of the shipping business with its "Amazon Instant" and its "Amazon Fresh". It's focusing on instant deliveries, which even FedEx doesn't do (let alone UPS). This is the same way FedEx got started when UPS was already around, it focused on overnight deliveries since they could charge exponentially more for items that would get shipped overnight.
And by focusing on instant deliveries, Amazon can acquire impulse buyers that would normally go to brick and mortar stores to get their fix.
Am I the only one who thought that the $100,000 bill was this bill and that the boy had earned a bug hunting/spell-checking bounty from Google for having caught the mistake?
Eh, why did you give a 12 year old this information in the first place? I am genuinely confused as to why he had the banking info needed.
I can't speak for Spain, but in France, I had a "Jeans" account when I was around that age.
It came with a bunch of comic books to teach me about banking and a banking ledger that I was supposed to fill out myself.
Except in the past those exclusive features usually had a reason behind them. Like the hardware didn't support the feature.
No, it was the same thing with the Nexus line as well.
Take the action bar library for instance. When it first came on the scene, it wasn't backwards compatible. The community created its own library for backwards-compatibility. Eventually, Google supported an official version of the backwards compatibility library and the community version was discontinued. There are dozens of other examples like this.
First Google comes up with a new feature, which it implements on the latest hardware and on its latest flagship device. Then later, the real work begins, both the open source community and Google try to bake an adaptation of that new feature into a compatibility library (that hopefully won't run like a dog on the older hardware).
Being forced to upgrade to something which in every other country in the world has caused a significant drop in credit card fraud is a damn good thing, not a sueable offence.
The new chip system in the US works differently than the chip system in Europe, so no, the US isn't being forced to adopt what the rest of the world is already using.
For instance, in France I can use a European chip card in a restaurant in the middle of nowhere where there is no cell phone reception (or no landlines), and the transaction gets reconciled later when the transactions get uploaded. In the US, under the new system, no one is allowed to keep the data around for later reconciliation, even in an encrypted form, so that means that the multitudes of authentication handshakes must occur correctly before the transactions get authorised (even if the amounts in question are tiny).
This is why using smartcards in Europe takes no time at all to get authorized, they're actually faster than magnetic debit/credit cards. But this is also why the current smartcards in US (when used through the chip) are so slow, although in theory they're supposed to be more secure than the European smartcards.
I would remove some pictures, but not all of them. Also, I would say "no" if her reason was that she's ugly, or some other non-sense like that.
If she really doesn't want to see her old pictures, she should just untag herself through Facebook and unfriend her parents.
In most jurisdictions, you need special permits and/or plate and/or insurance and/or background check and/or to pay taxes when you offer taxi service, which is exactly what Uber drivers are doing.
Yes, they do go through some background checks, although it's usually not as thorough as some of the taxi cab drivers have to go through, they carry commercial insurance, and they do pay special taxes to some of the cities and airports they service.
That being said, Uber cars are more like limousines, black-for-hire cars, or airport shuttles, not taxis, they're not allowed to pick up people who flag them on the streets, nor do they have special taxi stands that they can wait at, but they're allowed to pick passengers up if the service was pre-arranged by telephone just like a limousine driver would be allowed to do.
Yes, "ride-hailing" doesn't work. Also, hailing implies the visual flagging down of the Uber car on the street, which Uber drivers are not allowed to respond to.
A more accurate label is ride-sharing. After all, taxi cabs do not pick up different people who do not know each other at different points on a route to share part of their journey. That is more like airport shuttles, or buses, except unlike airport shuttles or buses, Uber/Lyft does the matching of riders in real-time.
That will mean violating the customer's trust — if I am sorting by rankings, the site will be lying to me if they let (alleged) bigotry weight somebody down beyond the low rating the alleging party has left.
Uber already does that to a degree. If you ignore three requests in a row for pickups, the driver is kicked offline for 30 minutes (in some areas).
The same thing could be done with AirBnB. It doesn't matter if the AirBnB owner is racist, or just unavailable. And it's too difficult to tell anyway. It's just that if the owner of an AirBnB is too unresponsive to some of his/her potential customers, AirBnB should just place that specific AirBnB at the back of the queue for a couple of days.
First off, I would never rent my house for a week or two. I just don't trust people that much.
Renting your own house is one thing. All your stuff is in there. But if you had a duplex for instance or a second apartment, that might be a different story. In my area, the riskier tenants are the ones that stay for more than 30 days, because then rent control and renters rights go into effect, and it becomes almost impossible to evict them (even if they decide to stop paying rent).
Second, if I was going to rent my house out for a week or two I would look at age first. That 50-year-old black couple is going to beat the 20-year-old single white dude. Every. Single. Time.
Does Airbnb give you their age? And what about the parent who gets an Airbnb for his/her 20 years old son? Are you allowed to refuse someone because their parents booked the room for them? I am sure you wouldn't know, but I assume that someone else reading this may know the answer.
Exactly. He chose his name as a "brand", he trademarked that name/brand, he sold that name/brand. He received large sums of money so others could exclusively use that name/brand. If he wants that name/brand he can buy it, just like the people he sold it to.
Actually, he may have a case.
Intel did rename MacAffee Security to Intel Security.
The phrase "use it or lose it," while cliché, aptly describes the underlying principles for obtaining and maintaining trademark rights in the United States.
Use, not registration, matters most in the United States.
See article.
And it's not like Intel doesn't have lawyers on staff.
The driver will not be able to reactivate the Autopilot until the car is stopped and put in 'Park.'
That's a really bad idea. If they really want to punish them, they should use a timer instead.
A few years ago, a friend drove a Prius and the GPS navigation input function didn't work unless she went less than 5 miles an hour, so what my friend ended up doing was slowing down at the most inappropriate places on freeways and highways just so she could use the built-in navigation.
No doubt, frustrated Tesla drivers will just start parking their car in the middle of the roads just so they can re-engage their auto-pilot. That's what happens when one tries to use technology to control human beings. Those human beings start rebelling and start acting like even bigger idiots, possibly causing even more accidents. Also, I suspect that many Tesla owners will just try to disable/postpone this last update for as long as they can.
An MRI machine needs 1,700 litres of liquid helium, which needs to be topped off regularly. That's the equivalent of 12,724 cubic meters. The airship needs 38,000 cubic meters of helium, which I assume also needs to be topped off regularly.
In other words, the airship uses Helium at the rate of three MRI machines (according to my layman calculation). I'm not making a judgement one way or another. I just wanted to quantify the comparison.
What happens when someone asks for a judge to recuse themselves because the litigation value tripled when the judge got assigned? It's a lot harder to defend the integrity of the system when supposedly impartial actors have quantifiable effects.
Lawyers, the media, and insurance companies already do try to quantify the rulings of judges.
It's not like this is anything new. Plus, it's not like these reports will be posted online for free. Some parts will, to gain attention and get publicity, but most of these won't since obviously the founder is trying to a make commercial product out of it since he's using YCombinator funding.
B) Rely on the user being able to pick a route from the road to the building entrance.
This is the easiest solution for now.
Bus and trains already have that problem. And that hasn't stopped those services from being useful to a segment of the population.
My mistake. I was thinking of Denmark. That's where the black plane was waiting for Snowden.
I'm sorry. You're right. I was thinking of Denmark. That's where the black plane was waiting for Snowden.
This again? You haven't been paying attention. Sweden did illegally rendition two Egyptians to the United States. Also, the Swedish government admitted as much that its previous government had authorized a US black plane to pick up Julian Assange once he'd get extradited back to Sweden.
Well it does look a lot like this phone, which is a Windows 10 branded android phone.
I don't see how that's relevant. If Google antagonizes some of the carriers, that will just fragment the mobile space even more, because those carriers will just find a different OS that allows them to install whatever crapware they want on it (for instance: Tizen, CyanogenMod, Windows Phone, etc.).
Here is the law in question. https://www.law.cornell.edu/us...
May be someone can point out the relevant paragraphs. I'm afraid I couldn't do it. My eyes glazed over after the first page.
Why should Google do that? It would only sell fewer phones that way.
It's really the responsibility of the consumer to get a an unlocked Android phone with no contract. The consumer has that option already.
No, that's not quite a duress password. That's girlfriend #1 password, or that's girlfriend #2 password. Each password just logs into a different account (but it does it quickly and seamlessly so that the person doesn't know they're login in to a different account). For instance, you could have a picture of your girlfriend #1 as the wallpaper when you unlock your phone with your first password. The email app would lead to one particular email client that girlfriend #2 doesn't know about. The gallery would only contain pictures of girlfriend #1, but not #2. The text app would only contain texts that you sent to girlfriend #1. Etc.
it could potentially be configured to disregard entry attempts if your attempt to access was not sincere
That problem is already solved.
My old Android LG G2 for instance allows me to login under a different profile based on the particular pattern/password I am using. This is handy if you have multiple girlfriends (not that I even have one yet, but I am speaking hypothetically, so let's say I do get one girlfriend, and then a second one). If they see your password/pattern, they're under the illusion that it is your main password, so they can snoop all they want using that same password, and the system doesn't give them a clue that they're in a particular profile.
Of course, you can disable apps and functionality for each particular profile you have on that phone, and that part can be handy if you're loaning your phone to a kid, or to a perfect stranger, but then of course, it may become obvious that they're using a crippled profile if too much standard functionality is missing from it.
And for your laptop, you just need to carry around a Linux laptop, or a Chromebook. What are they going to do? Fine you for not having access to all the accounts on your machine? Or fine you for using your Chromebook in Incognito mode?
As to the traces of cocaine, I don't think that's fair. Almost all US currency has traces of cocaine on it and I assume it's the same with Canadian currency. And if he carried cash in his bag, then obviously their spectrometer is going to find traces of cocaine in it. It would be weird if they didn't.
As to the $5,000 cash (whether it's US dollars or Canadian dollars), I don't see why that's even relevant. It's well under the legal limit and a drug mule would probably carry 50+ times that amount anyway. What do the Canadian authorities want anyway? If they tell their Canadian citizens not to carry cash when crossing the US border, US border officials will find that suspicious and may turn them around back to Canada. It's going to be damned if you do, or damned if you don't.
No, but this time it's different, they actually found a Windows Phone 8.1 user!