In more concrete terms, there might be more GIMP users if GIMP were as easy to learn as Photoshop.
Adobe Photoshop is easy to learn? Seriously? Hopefully, Gimp developers can do better than Photoshop in terms of usability. In my opinion, both Gimp and Photoshop are very difficult to learn.
And the only app that's breaking new ground in terms of usability is Inkscape (not that Inkscape is a substitute for either Photoshop or Gimp, it's not, but it's becoming better and more usable than all the other proprietary vector graphics alternatives).
Is this a joke generated by a text bot? Or simply a super poorly written Slashdot summary? Why can't the Slashdot summary explain what this supposed "sound wave technology" does right from the beginning? Or are we all already supposed to know about this technology?
I have seen this before with other open source projects. Members of the project who are developing suddenly get very paranoid of the guy who has been footing the bill for their domain or services.
There is some truth to what you're saying, just like there is some truth about the other side as well.
Some people make it a point to get a domain name under their own personal name, and personal credit card, even when asked not to do so initially by the leaders of the project. After all, among developers (and outside of university students who can be broke), people in Technology can usually afford the domain name registration fees, so this action is really not about money. It's usually about control.
During the start of an open source project, it isn't always clear who is going to be the top contributor, and it isn't even clear if the project is going to be successful at all. But you can often see people jockeying for position, and one of the ways that gets done is through domain name registration.
And whether that initial registration is done with benevolence in mind, or less than a benevolent intent. You can be sure that if I had been the one in the control of the cyanogen related domain name, I would have been dismayed by the one-sided partnership deal with Microsoft and I would have looked in to cash in on that partnership as well (or had I been more idealistic, I would have probably directed my domain name elsewhere as a form of protest). After all, if the leadership of Cyanogen was willing to ignore the pleas of 99% of its early adopters and sell out to Microsoft and install Bing, Outlook, Office, etc by default on all its ROMs in exchange for a sizable mountain of cash. Why shouldn't I do the same? After all, it was my domain name (hypothetically speaking). I loaned it out as long as the organization/company was heading in the direction I wanted them to, but why should I suddenly surrender my domain name at just about the time the company is going into a completely different direction?
That is to say. Cyanogen should consider itself lucky I wasn't the one with that domain name (or worse yet, someone idealistic like RMS with that domain), or the end result would have been much more costly for Cyanogen.
The law lists what is and what is not a "biometric identifier ":
"Biometric identifier" means a retina or iris scan,
fingerprint, voiceprint, or scan of hand or face geometry.
Biometric identifiers do not include writing samples,
written signatures, photographs,
And yet, Facebook doesn't just store photographs, if Facebook only stored photographs, then it would have a heck of a time trying to query information every time there was a Facial Recognition query.
It's just like Shazam, while I am sure that Shazam possesses the music track of every possible song out there. There is a lot processing, analysis, and audio indexing/voice printing that is done on those music tracks so that Shazam is able to recognize a music track in a room full of ambient noise or recognize a short music clip distorted and spliced into another song.
Deep learning does not use "biometric identifiers" or "face geometry", it operates on the images directly.
That's a tough argument to make, because images of people's faces will correlate with people's faces.
For instance, a neural network may not have any notion that two eyes (or two pupils) have a proportional distance with another characteristic of the face, but that doesn't mean it can't infer biometric identifiers from images (if given enough sample images and given enough users that are willing to train it by tagging other users and conveniently framing those faces in each sample image given).
After all, some biometric locks are already using facial recognition to lock/unlock devices (even if they're not very good at it yet). So it will be a tough sell to tell a judge that those so-called "biometric locks" don't use biometric identifiers at all since they're not using traditional human-language-based biometric identifiers.
- if you want to ply for hire and provide an unmetered service, you have to give customers a firm price in advance so you can't gouge them en route, you have to provide a pre-booking facility. Customers benefit from a cheap known price and some reasonable degree of certainty that you'll be there when you say you will.
Here, you must be complaining about existing mini-cabs, because Uber solves this problem quite nicely.
Uber gives you a "firm" range of what you will have to pay. In other words, it won't charge you more than the upper range it gave you. That is in itself fantastic. When I stayed in London, I can't tell you the number of times mini-cab drivers have lied to me about the final price (or lied to me about not having enough change).
If London mini-cab drivers have never lied to you, then either you've never taken mini-cabs, or you're lying.
The App is also a nice thing and I could see a role for Uber (or others) there. Set up a system where multiple companies can join so you can get a taxi easily. e.g. something like http://www.pizza.be/en/ [pizza.be] where people can order from many different places in Belgium.
Do that on a European or even worldwide manner and you are golden.
This idea has been tried many times in the US (ever since the iPhone became popular)
In the US, these types of apps simply don't work reliably enough in highly populated areas and during peak hours. You'll order a taxi, but the taxi won't show up. That's because taxis don't have a strong enough incentive to honor their commitment. Since they're taxis, they can commit to picking someone up, but if they see someone else on the road halfway to their pickup, or if they hear of a more lucrative pick up on their radio, they'll go pick up that other person instead.
Many times, this doesn't even need to be a straight lie, the taxi drivers will just tell themselves, that other person can just wait a little bit more while I take care care of this other customer right now. Or they'll tell themselves, there is enough wiggle room for me to squeeze one more client, especially if I can find someone to pick up who needs to go to the location near where my other pick up will be. All this optimization is great for the taxi drivers, but it's not great for the customers.
Uber, on the other hand, doesn't work that way (except for UberPool where the customer explicitly chooses that option to be more flexible in exchange for an upfront discount). But with Uber, if you order a normal Uber ride (and not UberPool), the system is first-in and first-out (just like with just-in-time lean manufacturing, if you don't mind me using the analogy). Once a Uber driver accepts the offer of a customer, that driver can no longer see other potential pick ups he can make on the map (the map just won't show him that information). Also, that Uber driver doesn't have competing offers streaming in from a dispatch center over the radio, or via telephone or text, or just via driving (since Uber is not allowed to pick up people who flags down a driver from a sidewalk). In addition to that, the customer is even reassured that the Uber car is on its way (without even asking), since as soon a driver accepts his/her offer, the customer sees the Uber car moving in real-time towards the pick-up location he suggested.
In other words, Uber is offering a service that taxi services simply can not offer (without the taxi services giving up on some of the advantages they have of having multiples ways of getting customers, which will never happen). Also, the barrier to entry for Uber drivers is much lower. For most of them, they can just use their existing car and just start driving for Uber only for a few hours each month (just to see what it's like). That's a very attractive proposition for potential drivers. Many of those potential drivers may already have full time jobs, part time jobs, or other serious commitments like kids to take care when they're not in day care or in school.
Khan Academy needs to stop this. I have never donated to Khan Academy, but I hope that anyone who has will stop donating. We don't need more bullshit patents, even for "good". If every good cause and non-profit starts to patent bullshit ideas, things are only going to get worse for everyone.
What about the women who have "social development issues" that draw them to the field, or do they get off with a wink and a nod?
I've researched this topic because of my own speech development issues, which was mainly stuttering along with other speech-related problems.
Women are much less likely to have a stuttering problem when they're younger. And even if they do have that problem, they are much more likely to grow out of it later in life than their male counterparts. The same goes when they have communication problems arising out of a specific brain injury. Their recovery rate is much much higher than their male counterparts suffering from the same type of communication-related brain injury.
I don't remember the exact statistics, but they were quite significant. Believe me. I know that academics can lose their job for even suggesting that women are differently mentally able than men in some areas, but it's nevertheless true. Colorblindness, stuttering, other speech impediments, specific types of brain injuries, have completely different rates when it comes to women than men.
And yes, there is a small sample of autistic women who program and who do very well in the technology sector, along with a small sample of normal women who also program and do very well in the technology sector, but the autistic women in particular are likely to be punished for their lack of social skills and lack of social maturity (just like their male counterparts are). And to me at least, it's rather obvious why autistic women would be more attracted to becoming programmers, rather than nurses, or teachers, or something else.
I have never owned an iPhone. I've only had Android phones.
But I would never buy a used smart phone. Many used phones are going to be devices that had problems and that are being resold on the secondary market because of those problems.
Yes, but leaking the information that someone is 18 years old doesn't cost a company $240. It probably doesn't even cost the company one penny. He's going into hyperbole territory here.
HIV testing results, dating web site for cheaters, credit cards numbers along with personal identifiable information, yes, those types of breaches can cost the company who had those breaches dearly, but it really depends on the type of data that we're talking about.
The difference between OpenJDK and Java JDK is meaningless (In Android), so nothing will break
If that's true, why haven't they been using it all along? The first commercial Android phone was unveiled in late 2008. The OpenJDK class library was pretty complete by then.
The answer was Eclipse. Eclipse didn't work very well with the OpenJDK.
None on the OpenJDK side. OpenJDK has been the officially recommended JDK for Android development for the past year already.
I suppose this announcement means that Android will stop supporting the Oracle JDK from now on, and I suppose that means there will be a lot of breakage on that side.
That's pretty damned idiotic throwing away a $30 million program because you didn't want to spend another few $100 on a muffler and some padding.
The technology isn't being thrown away. Boston Dynamics is a private company that does other things than just work for the military.
Literally all you need is a better muffler, and add some sound proofing covering around the engine, maybe adds 10lbs at most.
Then don't forget to add to mass manufacturing, technician training, water proofing, dust proofing, night-vision, river crossing, heat masking, rapid deployment/transportation, people carrying, part replacements, bulletproofing (to a degree), redundancy-systems, possible malfunctions, etc.
It's a huge commitment to mass manufacture and deploy new technology like this. I am glad that the military is not jumping to mass manufacture the first prototype it gets. This kind of automation will eventually come, but it will take time to flesh out all the bugs and the edge cases.
In the meantime, 30 million dollars in research was a worthwhile investment.
I have a feeling that the financial services industry isn't going to miss millennial "talent" who needs to be able to dick around with their accounts on their smartphone anytime, anywhere.
And yet, just look at their advertisements.
Banks are now advertising services like sending payments to email addresses. They were so busy criticizing PayPal during the last ten years for doing just that, they kind of missed the boat on that one.
who needs to be able to dick around with their accounts on their smartphone anytime, anywhere.
That's the thing. I don't need to dick around with my account on my smartphone. I just want to know my bank balance. That's it. In fact, it would be great if the app on my smartphone couldn't make any financial transaction. This way, if I lose my phone one day, or if someone holds me at gunpoint, I can't transfer money to that person even if I wanted to.
Just give me my bank balance without forcing me to use the 30+ character password I normally use through the web site and that I enter using a full-size qwerty keyboard that I have sitting at home. Just tie my bank balance to a simple pin number (that is unrelated to my debit card pin number). This way, if someone borrows my phone, they don't get to see my balance. But if someone steals my phone and guesses the pin, it won't be the end of the world either.
Now I know that some banks are finally taking the hint and doing just that now, but it's a little late. The only innovation I've noticed in banking apps is coming from companies like PayPal, Mint, or Square (and even PayPal is no longer a good example, they've become so big, that they frequently sacrifice usability in favor of their own corporate ego).
Am I the only one who thinks the name has a subtle reminder of words like discredit? "de" is a bad prefix for "decentralized", IMO.
It's a bad name, yes, but it's not like they had the desire to jump TLDs, nor had the million dollars necessary to buy d3c3ntr8l1zed.org or decreed.org or decrud.org.
Until they become multi-millionaires of their own, decred.org will have to do.
The problem is that the US system reinforces poverty - schools are funded from local sources and poor districts provide poor education. Add to this a high rate of de-facto segregation.
Along the same lines, I think that prenatal care, subsidized daycare/preschool, parent time off after birth, more vacation days, and easier access to contraception/abortions, all could be reasons for those skewed statistics.
Unless the photographer has an actual proof of commercial compensation for the work, it's a law I think other countries should adopt as well.
This law already exists to some degree in most countries.
You can not publish the naked pictures of someone without a signed release form.
Not sure why it would take a court ruling for him to do so, in any case -
I wouldn't be surprised if the ex threatened via email/SMS to release those pictures in the first place.
The problem comes however in the amount of proof required to punish such an act. It is so easy to release a naked picture out on the internet anonymously. Anyone can do it, even the supposed victim.
We haven't even reached the stage of a prison colony yet. Let's do that first. Once Mars is no longer a prison colony, then we can start discussing the possibility of limited self-governance.
Who knows if this individual "security researcher" or his company might have decided to keep some of those private certs and credentials around for future use.
Actually, if there is a chance he has a copy of the signing keys, some of which can not be changed, Facebook should just pay the bounty, and consider itself lucky that the security researcher doesn't consider himself a criminal.
Facebook should take a page out of the US anti-nuclear proliferation playbook. If a country is trying to get the nuke. You punish it. You bomb it back to the dark ages. On the other hand, once a country already has a new working nuke (especially more than one). You put on a show for the rest of the world about punishing that country, but ultimately, you stop any serious punishment very quickly and you befriend the country in question.
There's legit whistle blowing, and then there's this... What was the point, to extort and harass ppl. with HIV?
You obviously didn't read their article, their point was to stop the leak. They didn't extort anyone. They just wanted the leak to stop (or at least the web site shut down).
This is a data breach for the sake of a data breach (and boosting the status of a cracker or group's ego - who is "anonymous" anyway, of course, so don't see the point -- ??).
Hackers? You're going a bit far.
This information was getting indexed by at least one commercial search engine. If the information is so easy to access that even a normal search engine has access to it. The web site has done something wrong and the person who found this out is probably not much of a hacker.
But if then, the web site refuses to fix the leak, nor shut down the web site, five days after you've notified them and been in communication with them. Then, there is something seriously wrong with the site. If I had been the person running the site, I would have shut down the web site immediately, period. There is no excuse. If you don't know how to fix it, that's fine, then please just shut down the site. It's better your site is down for a week, than all that data being exposed out there for that same week.
Furthermore since the web site owner is lying about the number of ip addresses having accessed that confidential data, I think they should be sued and shut down permanently by their users (or simply shut down by the authorities). This site provides a valuable service, but if they don't know what they're doing and they're lying when confronted about their mistakes, then someone else should step in and fill that void in the dating marketplace.
You're saying a union agreement is an agreement between an employer and its employees. You and I both know this is becoming less and less the case. The government is often the one coercing companies to unionize.
In this case especially with Uber, a couple of politicians have started all of this. The fact is, many Uber drivers are driving for Uber precisely because it offers them so much flexibility (and not because it's a union shop). Saying that those people should just move aside and quit if they don't want to join a union lacks empathy to their circumstances.
Why would you work for a company that has a union then?
That's an interesting sociopathic question.
So your view is that all the Uber drivers who don't want to be represented by a Union should just quit then? That should make things easier for you, right. Anyone who isn't willing to work for the common good of the group should just become selfless and quit whenever a Union comes in. Either be with us, or move out of the way.
I'll give you one concession. If you want me to contribute to a strike fund (or to a fund that pays for a Union lawyer), allow me to put aside money for that union in an escrow account at the very least, and if we don't strike, or if I don't need a lawyer, allow me to get that money back (with interests) whenever I leave my job.
Slashdot Mirror
In more concrete terms, there might be more GIMP users if GIMP were as easy to learn as Photoshop.
Adobe Photoshop is easy to learn? Seriously? Hopefully, Gimp developers can do better than Photoshop in terms of usability. In my opinion, both Gimp and Photoshop are very difficult to learn.
And the only app that's breaking new ground in terms of usability is Inkscape (not that Inkscape is a substitute for either Photoshop or Gimp, it's not, but it's becoming better and more usable than all the other proprietary vector graphics alternatives).
Is this a joke generated by a text bot? Or simply a super poorly written Slashdot summary? Why can't the Slashdot summary explain what this supposed "sound wave technology" does right from the beginning? Or are we all already supposed to know about this technology?
I have seen this before with other open source projects. Members of the project who are developing suddenly get very paranoid of the guy who has been footing the bill for their domain or services.
There is some truth to what you're saying, just like there is some truth about the other side as well.
Some people make it a point to get a domain name under their own personal name, and personal credit card, even when asked not to do so initially by the leaders of the project. After all, among developers (and outside of university students who can be broke), people in Technology can usually afford the domain name registration fees, so this action is really not about money. It's usually about control.
During the start of an open source project, it isn't always clear who is going to be the top contributor, and it isn't even clear if the project is going to be successful at all. But you can often see people jockeying for position, and one of the ways that gets done is through domain name registration.
And whether that initial registration is done with benevolence in mind, or less than a benevolent intent. You can be sure that if I had been the one in the control of the cyanogen related domain name, I would have been dismayed by the one-sided partnership deal with Microsoft and I would have looked in to cash in on that partnership as well (or had I been more idealistic, I would have probably directed my domain name elsewhere as a form of protest). After all, if the leadership of Cyanogen was willing to ignore the pleas of 99% of its early adopters and sell out to Microsoft and install Bing, Outlook, Office, etc by default on all its ROMs in exchange for a sizable mountain of cash. Why shouldn't I do the same? After all, it was my domain name (hypothetically speaking). I loaned it out as long as the organization/company was heading in the direction I wanted them to, but why should I suddenly surrender my domain name at just about the time the company is going into a completely different direction?
That is to say. Cyanogen should consider itself lucky I wasn't the one with that domain name (or worse yet, someone idealistic like RMS with that domain), or the end result would have been much more costly for Cyanogen.
The law under which the suit was filed:
http://www.ilga.gov/legislatio...
The law lists what is and what is not a "biometric identifier ":
"Biometric identifier" means a retina or iris scan,
fingerprint, voiceprint, or scan of hand or face geometry.
Biometric identifiers do not include writing samples,
written signatures, photographs,
And yet, Facebook doesn't just store photographs, if Facebook only stored photographs, then it would have a heck of a time trying to query information every time there was a Facial Recognition query.
It's just like Shazam, while I am sure that Shazam possesses the music track of every possible song out there. There is a lot processing, analysis, and audio indexing/voice printing that is done on those music tracks so that Shazam is able to recognize a music track in a room full of ambient noise or recognize a short music clip distorted and spliced into another song.
Deep learning does not use "biometric identifiers" or "face geometry", it operates on the images directly.
That's a tough argument to make, because images of people's faces will correlate with people's faces.
For instance, a neural network may not have any notion that two eyes (or two pupils) have a proportional distance with another characteristic of the face, but that doesn't mean it can't infer biometric identifiers from images (if given enough sample images and given enough users that are willing to train it by tagging other users and conveniently framing those faces in each sample image given).
After all, some biometric locks are already using facial recognition to lock/unlock devices (even if they're not very good at it yet). So it will be a tough sell to tell a judge that those so-called "biometric locks" don't use biometric identifiers at all since they're not using traditional human-language-based biometric identifiers.
- if you want to ply for hire and provide an unmetered service, you have to give customers a firm price in advance so you can't gouge them en route, you have to provide a pre-booking facility. Customers benefit from a cheap known price and some reasonable degree of certainty that you'll be there when you say you will.
Here, you must be complaining about existing mini-cabs, because Uber solves this problem quite nicely.
Uber gives you a "firm" range of what you will have to pay. In other words, it won't charge you more than the upper range it gave you. That is in itself fantastic. When I stayed in London, I can't tell you the number of times mini-cab drivers have lied to me about the final price (or lied to me about not having enough change).
If London mini-cab drivers have never lied to you, then either you've never taken mini-cabs, or you're lying.
The App is also a nice thing and I could see a role for Uber (or others) there. Set up a system where multiple companies can join so you can get a taxi easily. e.g. something like http://www.pizza.be/en/ [pizza.be] where people can order from many different places in Belgium.
Do that on a European or even worldwide manner and you are golden.
This idea has been tried many times in the US (ever since the iPhone became popular)
In the US, these types of apps simply don't work reliably enough in highly populated areas and during peak hours. You'll order a taxi, but the taxi won't show up. That's because taxis don't have a strong enough incentive to honor their commitment. Since they're taxis, they can commit to picking someone up, but if they see someone else on the road halfway to their pickup, or if they hear of a more lucrative pick up on their radio, they'll go pick up that other person instead.
Many times, this doesn't even need to be a straight lie, the taxi drivers will just tell themselves, that other person can just wait a little bit more while I take care care of this other customer right now. Or they'll tell themselves, there is enough wiggle room for me to squeeze one more client, especially if I can find someone to pick up who needs to go to the location near where my other pick up will be. All this optimization is great for the taxi drivers, but it's not great for the customers.
Uber, on the other hand, doesn't work that way (except for UberPool where the customer explicitly chooses that option to be more flexible in exchange for an upfront discount). But with Uber, if you order a normal Uber ride (and not UberPool), the system is first-in and first-out (just like with just-in-time lean manufacturing, if you don't mind me using the analogy). Once a Uber driver accepts the offer of a customer, that driver can no longer see other potential pick ups he can make on the map (the map just won't show him that information). Also, that Uber driver doesn't have competing offers streaming in from a dispatch center over the radio, or via telephone or text, or just via driving (since Uber is not allowed to pick up people who flags down a driver from a sidewalk). In addition to that, the customer is even reassured that the Uber car is on its way (without even asking), since as soon a driver accepts his/her offer, the customer sees the Uber car moving in real-time towards the pick-up location he suggested.
In other words, Uber is offering a service that taxi services simply can not offer (without the taxi services giving up on some of the advantages they have of having multiples ways of getting customers, which will never happen). Also, the barrier to entry for Uber drivers is much lower. For most of them, they can just use their existing car and just start driving for Uber only for a few hours each month (just to see what it's like). That's a very attractive proposition for potential drivers. Many of those potential drivers may already have full time jobs, part time jobs, or other serious commitments like kids to take care when they're not in day care or in school.
Khan Academy needs to stop this. I have never donated to Khan Academy, but I hope that anyone who has will stop donating. We don't need more bullshit patents, even for "good". If every good cause and non-profit starts to patent bullshit ideas, things are only going to get worse for everyone.
What about the women who have "social development issues" that draw them to the field, or do they get off with a wink and a nod?
I've researched this topic because of my own speech development issues, which was mainly stuttering along with other speech-related problems.
Women are much less likely to have a stuttering problem when they're younger. And even if they do have that problem, they are much more likely to grow out of it later in life than their male counterparts. The same goes when they have communication problems arising out of a specific brain injury. Their recovery rate is much much higher than their male counterparts suffering from the same type of communication-related brain injury.
I don't remember the exact statistics, but they were quite significant. Believe me. I know that academics can lose their job for even suggesting that women are differently mentally able than men in some areas, but it's nevertheless true. Colorblindness, stuttering, other speech impediments, specific types of brain injuries, have completely different rates when it comes to women than men.
And yes, there is a small sample of autistic women who program and who do very well in the technology sector, along with a small sample of normal women who also program and do very well in the technology sector, but the autistic women in particular are likely to be punished for their lack of social skills and lack of social maturity (just like their male counterparts are). And to me at least, it's rather obvious why autistic women would be more attracted to becoming programmers, rather than nurses, or teachers, or something else.
I have never owned an iPhone. I've only had Android phones.
But I would never buy a used smart phone. Many used phones are going to be devices that had problems and that are being resold on the secondary market because of those problems.
Holding (sensible) data also comes with a cost.
Yes, but leaking the information that someone is 18 years old doesn't cost a company $240. It probably doesn't even cost the company one penny. He's going into hyperbole territory here.
HIV testing results, dating web site for cheaters, credit cards numbers along with personal identifiable information, yes, those types of breaches can cost the company who had those breaches dearly, but it really depends on the type of data that we're talking about.
The states have a simple solution - KICK the TSA out of the state.
And then, the FAA grounds all the planes coming from and going into that state.
The difference between OpenJDK and Java JDK is meaningless (In Android), so nothing will break
If that's true, why haven't they been using it all along? The first commercial Android phone was unveiled in late 2008. The OpenJDK class library was pretty complete by then.
The answer was Eclipse. Eclipse didn't work very well with the OpenJDK.
I wonder how much stuff this is going to break?
None on the OpenJDK side. OpenJDK has been the officially recommended JDK for Android development for the past year already.
I suppose this announcement means that Android will stop supporting the Oracle JDK from now on, and I suppose that means there will be a lot of breakage on that side.
That's pretty damned idiotic throwing away a $30 million program because you didn't want to spend another few $100 on a muffler and some padding.
The technology isn't being thrown away. Boston Dynamics is a private company that does other things than just work for the military.
Literally all you need is a better muffler, and add some sound proofing covering around the engine, maybe adds 10lbs at most.
Then don't forget to add to mass manufacturing, technician training, water proofing, dust proofing, night-vision, river crossing, heat masking, rapid deployment/transportation, people carrying, part replacements, bulletproofing (to a degree), redundancy-systems, possible malfunctions, etc.
It's a huge commitment to mass manufacture and deploy new technology like this. I am glad that the military is not jumping to mass manufacture the first prototype it gets. This kind of automation will eventually come, but it will take time to flesh out all the bugs and the edge cases.
In the meantime, 30 million dollars in research was a worthwhile investment.
I have a feeling that the financial services industry isn't going to miss millennial "talent" who needs to be able to dick around with their accounts on their smartphone anytime, anywhere.
And yet, just look at their advertisements.
Banks are now advertising services like sending payments to email addresses. They were so busy criticizing PayPal during the last ten years for doing just that, they kind of missed the boat on that one.
who needs to be able to dick around with their accounts on their smartphone anytime, anywhere.
That's the thing. I don't need to dick around with my account on my smartphone. I just want to know my bank balance. That's it. In fact, it would be great if the app on my smartphone couldn't make any financial transaction. This way, if I lose my phone one day, or if someone holds me at gunpoint, I can't transfer money to that person even if I wanted to.
Just give me my bank balance without forcing me to use the 30+ character password I normally use through the web site and that I enter using a full-size qwerty keyboard that I have sitting at home. Just tie my bank balance to a simple pin number (that is unrelated to my debit card pin number). This way, if someone borrows my phone, they don't get to see my balance. But if someone steals my phone and guesses the pin, it won't be the end of the world either.
Now I know that some banks are finally taking the hint and doing just that now, but it's a little late. The only innovation I've noticed in banking apps is coming from companies like PayPal, Mint, or Square (and even PayPal is no longer a good example, they've become so big, that they frequently sacrifice usability in favor of their own corporate ego).
Am I the only one who thinks the name has a subtle reminder of words like discredit? "de" is a bad prefix for "decentralized", IMO.
It's a bad name, yes, but it's not like they had the desire to jump TLDs, nor had the million dollars necessary to buy d3c3ntr8l1zed.org or decreed.org or decrud.org.
Until they become multi-millionaires of their own, decred.org will have to do.
The problem is that the US system reinforces poverty - schools are funded from local sources and poor districts provide poor education. Add to this a high rate of de-facto segregation.
Along the same lines, I think that prenatal care, subsidized daycare/preschool, parent time off after birth, more vacation days, and easier access to contraception/abortions, all could be reasons for those skewed statistics.
Unless the photographer has an actual proof of commercial compensation for the work, it's a law I think other countries should adopt as well.
This law already exists to some degree in most countries.
You can not publish the naked pictures of someone without a signed release form.
Not sure why it would take a court ruling for him to do so, in any case -
I wouldn't be surprised if the ex threatened via email/SMS to release those pictures in the first place.
The problem comes however in the amount of proof required to punish such an act. It is so easy to release a naked picture out on the internet anonymously. Anyone can do it, even the supposed victim.
messaging apps and chatbots threaten Google's role as the Internet's premier discovery engine
I mean, wtf??
This is a partial revival of Google Wave, which allowed any third party developer to create bots and share it with others.
It's a cool idea, but it's more of an engineer's personal itch than a real problem people are facing.
We haven't even reached the stage of a prison colony yet. Let's do that first. Once Mars is no longer a prison colony, then we can start discussing the possibility of limited self-governance.
Who knows if this individual "security researcher" or his company might have decided to keep some of those private certs and credentials around for future use.
Actually, if there is a chance he has a copy of the signing keys, some of which can not be changed, Facebook should just pay the bounty, and consider itself lucky that the security researcher doesn't consider himself a criminal.
Facebook should take a page out of the US anti-nuclear proliferation playbook. If a country is trying to get the nuke. You punish it. You bomb it back to the dark ages. On the other hand, once a country already has a new working nuke (especially more than one). You put on a show for the rest of the world about punishing that country, but ultimately, you stop any serious punishment very quickly and you befriend the country in question.
There's legit whistle blowing, and then there's this... What was the point, to extort and harass ppl. with HIV?
You obviously didn't read their article, their point was to stop the leak. They didn't extort anyone. They just wanted the leak to stop (or at least the web site shut down).
This is a data breach for the sake of a data breach (and boosting the status of a cracker or group's ego - who is "anonymous" anyway, of course, so don't see the point -- ??).
Hackers? You're going a bit far.
This information was getting indexed by at least one commercial search engine. If the information is so easy to access that even a normal search engine has access to it. The web site has done something wrong and the person who found this out is probably not much of a hacker.
But if then, the web site refuses to fix the leak, nor shut down the web site, five days after you've notified them and been in communication with them. Then, there is something seriously wrong with the site. If I had been the person running the site, I would have shut down the web site immediately, period. There is no excuse. If you don't know how to fix it, that's fine, then please just shut down the site. It's better your site is down for a week, than all that data being exposed out there for that same week.
Furthermore since the web site owner is lying about the number of ip addresses having accessed that confidential data, I think they should be sued and shut down permanently by their users (or simply shut down by the authorities). This site provides a valuable service, but if they don't know what they're doing and they're lying when confronted about their mistakes, then someone else should step in and fill that void in the dating marketplace.
You're saying a union agreement is an agreement between an employer and its employees. You and I both know this is becoming less and less the case. The government is often the one coercing companies to unionize.
In this case especially with Uber, a couple of politicians have started all of this. The fact is, many Uber drivers are driving for Uber precisely because it offers them so much flexibility (and not because it's a union shop). Saying that those people should just move aside and quit if they don't want to join a union lacks empathy to their circumstances.
Why would you work for a company that has a union then?
That's an interesting sociopathic question.
So your view is that all the Uber drivers who don't want to be represented by a Union should just quit then? That should make things easier for you, right. Anyone who isn't willing to work for the common good of the group should just become selfless and quit whenever a Union comes in. Either be with us, or move out of the way.
I'll give you one concession. If you want me to contribute to a strike fund (or to a fund that pays for a Union lawyer), allow me to put aside money for that union in an escrow account at the very least, and if we don't strike, or if I don't need a lawyer, allow me to get that money back (with interests) whenever I leave my job.