They're assholes who are about to get completely fucked and lose whatever kind of war they think they can win against Google and Apple.
Or they could just be using this alliance/app as leverage to try to get better rates than the standard Visa, or MasterCard rates. Not to mention, better access to the data of its own paying customers. After all, you can bet Google and Apple will try to resell ads and intelligence to the highest bidders, whoever those bidders might be, based purely on the data of the purchase history inside those stores.
A chip embedded in your arm is meaningless without context. Take for example, an Holocaust survivor with a tattooed number on his arm. Or take a person with a safety tattoo listing all the things he's deadly allergic to. Neither of those things are the same as a journalist being tattooed with a meaningless number on his arm.
If those ten volunteers were really serious about testing the technology in a negative light, they should just spent some time as prisoners in a real prison where everything gets tracked and counted by NFC readers at the very least. The Type II tag itself has such a small amount of memory, it can't really be used for any serious authentication outside of a closed loop system like a prison environment.
At best outside of prison use, this NFC tag could link to a shortened url, or contain such information as a Twitter handle, or a LinkedIn user name.
Did they really deceive the religious student organization? If they did, then the student organization can reject them if that's what they want to do. If the religious student organization still wants the conference to go on, despite its agenda, then the State school can't really do anything about it because it would be an obvious case of religious discrimination.
If students and faculty are really worried about the image of the school, they should just put on a competing event. That is, if they really care that much about it. Personally, I wouldn't, I care much more about sleeping-in on a Saturday morning.
Apple doesn't get a penny from the end user or from the retailer, so I suppose Google doesn't either. With Apple Pay the retailer pays the lowest rate available (percentages depend on how secure the payment method is; the more secure, the cheaper for the merchant).
This is how things are advertised to the merchants, it's cheaper for them if there is more security. The truth of the matter is that it's the retailer who is on the hook for fraud liability-wise, not the banks. And the real truth is that the rate a retailer has to pay is largely based on its bargaining power and the projected size of its card transactions.
Apple gets some money from the bank; the bank saves money by having less fraud.
Apple gets money from the bank for each transaction a user makes (that would be my guess). Apple also gets valuable information about purchase history and therefore can more closely serve targeted advertisements to those existing customers of the retailer by selling those ads to the retailer itself, or reselling those ads to its closest competitors, or to the upstream manufacturer/brand owner (or yet again, they could resell those ads to the competing manufacturers or to the competing brands).
And like I said previously, the bank doesn't save money by having less fraud, since it's really the retailers who carry all the liability for fraud (when it's not the consumer's fault). The reason a bank might want to do this is because letting an iPhone user use his own phone for transactions might increase the potential volume of transactions that a bank already makes for each customer. Not only that, but perhaps, Apple might also have made the deal to share more information with the banks/visa regarding their own users. With GPS tracking, car navigation, financial tagging by the user, call history, browser history, etc. Apple would be able to provide a much more complete picture to the banks of what users do when they buy things with their iPhone.
Yes, and that doesn't relate to what I said. There's nothing inherently wrong about living in fantasy. If they want to do that, I don't really care, and I'm not going to tell others whether or not they're living life to the fullest.
There is nothing inherently wrong with being obese, depressed, dying early, either I suppose.
It's just that I hope my own family members and my friends don't end up living that way.
I think "criminal histories" in this case is probably just a code-phrase for "smoked weed".
Lt. Col. Sharlene Pigg makes it sound like the military is relaxing its recruiting standards over criminal records because it needs "hackers".
But the truth of the matter is, the military has already relaxed its recruiting standards over criminal records. It did it for Vietnam and Korea when nobody else wanted to go. And it did it again ever since the war in Iraq got started, even formerly convicted felons have been able to get in (not just former weed smokers).
I'd say don't believe the hype regarding their need for hackers. The military is notoriously bad at matching recruits with jobs according to their existing technical abilities. If you want to do cyber warfare, get yourself a bachelor of art in something, anything, so that you get yourself recruited as an officer at the very least, to increase your chances -- not guarantee them mind you. If you enter the military without a degree because you like programming, or worse because you like playing video games, expect to be used as IED fodder in the Middle East, for the jobs that no one else wants to do.
Positive thinkers already get some of the mental-benefit of the task being complete.
I agree with this. This is like the guy who fantasizes about a woman he has a crush on without taking action. The more he fantasizes about that woman, the more he jerks off to her image, in the long-run -- the even less likely he'll be prepared to deal with her in real life. For the ladies, please reverse the genders into what I've just said, and the same will be true.
It's like people who eat empty calories instead of eating proper meals, or people who love losing themselves in power fantasies created by comic books, hollywood studios, and game studios, instead of living life to the fullest in the real world (not that everybody is like that, I'm just talking about the more extreme cases, the ones that have truly substituted fantasy worlds for their own realities).
That saps some of the motivation to finish, since they've already received part of the payoff.
That's true to an extent, but some would say that if you think that motivation is a pre-condition needed to get things done, then you've already created yourself an extra mental barrier that will prevent you from getting things done in the first place.
Action is not always the result of internal motivation. Just think of the last job you had, or the last difficult classes you've taken. Where you always motivated to work, or to study? Probably not, and yet, you probably still managed to show up to work and do it anyway, or study what needed to be studied. Often times, that extra motivation and that extra energy is not the pre-condition of the action, but the actual consequence of having taken that action in the first place.
Case in point, I used to attend public speaking clubs (Toastmasters clubs) late at night. Often times, I've had a long day already before attending those meetings and I was unmotivated to go to those meetings. And yet when I still went anyway, my energy levels went up, not down, as a result. So if there is a perfect time for taking action, it's when you're feeling unmotivated. That feeling of unmotivation should be your internal trigger, instead of being the excuse you tell yourself for doing nothing.
The theft of the photographs, a statement from the company insisted, was not the result of “any breach in any of Apple’s systems including iCloud or Find my iPhone.”
The only thing Apple did wrong was not to educate its users about security.
“When I step back from this terrible scenario that happened and say what more could we have done, I think about the awareness piece,” he told the Wall Street Journal. “I think we have a responsibility to ratchet that up. That’s not really an engineering thing.”
T-Mobile I think gives you a free 200mb/month no matter what, so if you use cell network lightly that can be fantastic.
Do not trust T-Mobile on that promise. I bought two sim cards from T-mobile with the same promise, 200 mb/month "for life" and each sim card doesn't even need to be activated. I read the fine prints very carefully. That was true for about six months, then the sim cards stopped working.
I think T-Mobile just regretted having offered that deal. I would have complained, but I'm just too lazy to do so because I did get some service and I'm just out $40.
Overall, I still think T-Mobile is the least dishonest mobile carrier of the nationwide carriers. The second one is Sprint. Third is AT&T. And fourth is Verizon (even thought Verizon has the very best and widest coverage I've experienced in all the areas I frequent). I'm a mobile phone software developer, so I do get to experience many cell phone networks.
Well, the Russian government was not forced to pay any reimbursements for the survivors, as there were no physical disabilities as the result of using the agent on them.
dead people don't count as disabilities
To be fair, Putin might have changed that in 2013.
Now in Russia, the immediate families of terrorists are financially liable for the damages their family members caused. It's just too bad we don't have a law like that in the US, or the Bin Laden family would have had Osama Bin Laden killed, or imprisoned, as a financial precaution for preserving its billions of dollars.
What's the catchy term going to be for people who jump in front of autonomous vehicles and then sue?
Those would be called youtube idiot celebrities.
Because if you're going to jump in front of a car to try to scam someone, you better make sure that car doesn't have a dash cam that contradicts your story.
Don't forget the internet was invented by DARPA. Just like missiles and nukes and subs and carriers, the internet is a weapon. It is slow, but very sure to penetrate and destroy dictatorships and repressive governments worldwide. It's slow enough to say that we just deployed it recently. Even so, a number of governments have already fallen or been pressured by it; we see repressive regimes like China throwing all kinds of defenses up against it. I don't see how even China can stand against it for very long.
Assange gets this, at least on some level.
Assange gets this more than you know. A lot of what you've said about the internet could also be said of WikiLeaks. Just like missiles and nukes and subs and carriers, WikiLeaks is a weapon. It is slow, but very sure to penetrate and destroy dictatorships and repressive governments worldwide. It's slow enough to say that we just deployed it recently. Even so, a number of governments have already fallen or been pressured by it; we see repressive regimes like China throwing all kinds of defenses up against it. I don't see how even China can stand against it for very long.
That would mean America wins, and he sees America as the enemy. Oh well, suck it Assange. The business of America is business. The only real way to do business, is when people are free, and can spend their money on stuff they want. That's us winning.
No, when people are free, that can be us losing in some cases. If the Saudi family loses power, that's us losing. If Iran or Venezuela are allowed to sell their own oil to whomever they like. Again, that's us losing. And that's really the main problem of either the internet or wikileaks. Either of those tools are indiscriminate in the repressive governments they can pressure, and even take down.
You speak of free choice, the free market, and freedom, but that's really what WikiLeaks was originally all about. Knowing which government officials are corrupt protects the integrity of the free market. Knowing what our government does abroad with the military helps us make better informed decisions. It's all very simple really. Knowing that a politician's actions could be exposed to the people who voted him in is really one of the best ways of keeping that politician relatively honest. The same goes for dictators to some degree. After all, even if people can't vote someone out, they can still throw someone out (assuming, they have a big enough crowd behind them and their outrage is big enough).
You acting superior because you're from somewhere else is equivalent to an American acting superior because he's an American.
You missed his point. It's not because he is from China that he's not indoctrinated. It's because he's originally from China and left to come to America decades ago. In other words, he considers himself not indoctrinated because he claims he experienced two completely different countries.
So for instance, someone fluent in Japanese and living/working in Japan could have an equally eye-opening perspective if he had first been born and raised a significant part of his life in the US (at least, that would be my interpretation of the parent poster's opinion).
Nice to see breakthrough research like this coming from a single-payer healthcare system like the UK. When people start saying that the only places that can afford groundbreaking medical research are the ones where the "customers" pay a fortune, it'll be good to be able to point them to things like this.
What you're assuming is not true. Rich and upper middle class people in the UK still pay a fortune for private healthcare. Sometimes that's the only way to get around the rationed care and the impossibly long waiting lists of the UK public healthcare system.
Also and more to the point, this particular research was funded by two foundations, both of which only seem to be funded through private corporations and private individuals.
The groundbreaking research was supported by the Nicholls Spinal Injury Foundation (NSIF) and the UK Stem Cell Foundation (UKSCF). UKSCF was set up in 2007 to speed up progress of promising stem cell research - the charity has to date contributed 2.5m. NSIF was set up by chef David Nicholls after his son Daniel was paralysed from the arms down in a swimming accident in 2003. To date the charity has given £1m to fund the research in London and a further £240,000 for the work in Poland.
Take a look at the list of corporate logos and the list of private patrons that seem to back the Nicholls Spinal Injury Foundation (NSIF). And take a look at the web site for the UK Stem Cell Foundation (UKSCF). For that second Foundation, it's less clear who the backers are, but still I don't see anything crediting the British government for providing any of the funds.
The scientists hope to treat another 10 patients, in Poland and Britain over the coming years, although that will depend on the research receiving funding.
Also on that note, I have no doubt that those two foundations will receive an avalanche of funding after this announcement (both private and public funding). That's usually how things go. Everybody will be wanting to be part of their success. Personally, I hope that this preliminary result isn't a scam. If this result is really true and can be replicated by other institutions, then it will mean the end of paralysis for many people. And I just hope that's true.
Disclaimer: Please do not assume that I'm against the idea of national single-payer systems. I'm actually for single-payer systems, but I just don't think that the UK system is a particularly good example. My family has experienced the French single payer system, the British single payer system, in addition to the pre-Obama US healthcare system, and putting aside my critic of the pre-Obama US healthcare system, I find the French single payer system far better than the British one (although, it can be extremely expensive and wasteful as well).
If management really wants a custom solution, have someone create a custom web site/wiki/CRM that embeds or directs the user to the sign-up page on EventBrite. The end result will be a mashup of sorts, but it should work just fine, and even if the custom web site goes down on the day of the event because it's badly coded or whatever, the EventBrite sign-up page and related infrastructure will still work, so your event will still be able to go on as planned.
Do you even know what you just said? It knows when you go up and down floors. All this data mining, they know your address, your GPS coordinates, and which floor you're on. Maybe not down to the room number, but I bet they can deduce that through other means (steps taken, etc.). One has to wonder what all this information is going to eventually be used for, and perhaps what the use for it is already.
Yes, I realize what I've said, but I've done the privacy thing. I've rooted my Android phone and installed a privacy-focused ROM, but that just ended up drastically limiting my user experience and annoyed the hell out of me. I'm not doing that again.
The corporations can overthrow the government and throw you in Gitmo. I'm not going to be the one to stop them. I like my comforts and my conveniences far too much to do anything about it.
Actually, the barometer on my phone is pretty good. Absent a radical atmospheric change, it roughly knows when I've climbed one floor in an elevator for instance. I doubt that the gyroscope sensors could be giving it this level of information. In any case, by itself this information is almost useless, but when correlated with other data points from other sensors, that's when application developers could use that information to infer much more useful information.
For instance, with this kind of information, a car navigation app might be able to realize more quickly that you didn't take the on-ramp you were supposed to take. Or it could infer that you made it halfway through a tunnel. Or it could tell you on what floor you've parked your car (assuming, it could calculate out the atmospheric information it could obtain from other sources). Etc. The same goes for health apps. Walking on a flat surface vs. walking uphill makes a world of difference in the number of calories you're burning. I personally very much doubt that the cheap pedometers you can get at the local drugstore for less than 10 dollars can tell the difference between a flat surface and uphill.
This is about abusive, manipulative, disruptive and often threatening behavior that would not be tolerated off-line in the name of free speech --- because it is the enemy of free speech.
Free speech cannot survive in an atmosphere of fear.
Free speech cannot survive when speakers are shouted down, bullied and hounded off stage.
Free speech cannot survive the mob.
No, this law is mostly about drinking and tweeting, and tweeting racist things as a result.
In the UK, the maximum penalty for someone drinking and driving, when a life isn't actually lost as a result, is up 6 months in jail. However, if you happen to be drinking and tweeting (and not driving), then that maximum penalty is multiplied by four.
Free speech cannot survive when speakers are shouted down, bullied and hounded off stage.
Free speech cannot survive the mob.
May be, but not in the tweeting cases prosecuted by the Crown. In each case, the mob sided with the target of the tweets, not the offender. And of course, we're not talking about online school bullying with this particular law. If this law was aimed at stopping school bullying, there would be a provision for underaged offenders, which there isn't. And it would be applied to those school cases, which as of now it hasn't.
...that would not be tolerated off-line in the name of free speech
That's a nice idea, but you haven't spend any time around drunk people. When a drunk person gets belligerent, you throw them out of the premises, or if you're not the owner of the premises, you walk away from them. Throwing them in jail is the last possible resort, only to be used, when that person is a danger to others, or a danger to himself (like when he or she is hitting other people, or trying to drive a car).
Throwing trolls in jail isn't going to solve the problem of trolls. For one thing, there will still be people trolling from outside the UK (they will do so just because they can, as a taunt against the British authorities). And for a second thing, people aren't going to stop drinking and tweeting, even inside the UK, so the angry judges and politicians are likely to be even more frustrated with the results and come up with even more draconian measures.
How did I miss this halcyon era when Internet ads were "fun and informative"?
The rentals section of Craigslist and their jobs offered section are actually useful and informative for the users (although admittedly, I don't think those sections are considered "fun" unless you include the free sections of Craigslist) . Those two sections, rentals and jobs, require money to post each listing. If those paid sections didn't have such a barrier to entry, then they would be swamped with spam and duplicate posts, even more spam and duplicate posts than other sections on Craigslist already have.
But aside from Craigslist, I'm not aware of any company that has made paid advertisements useful for the actual users. And since Snapchat has already accepted 50 million of dollars for its C Series funding from a well known hedge fund, Snapchat will be required to become the next Facebook, or die trying, and in my personal opinion that never bodes well for the users.
ChromeOS on the other hand, is made for the desktop paradigm of multiple simultaneous overlapping windows, with controls that are sized for mouse/touchpad usage, not direct touch usage. Sure, Chromebooks have large touchpads now for gesture controls that are kinda sorta similar to what you get on touchscreen devices, but I know I'd much rather use a touchpad than drag my grubby mitts all over the screen, leaving greasy fingerprints.
And the reverse is true as well. There are several ChromeOS with touch on the market right now, and I own one of them, but the problem is that ChromeOS is useless for the touch paradigm.
It's not really the greasy fingerprints that annoy me. For me, it's the fact that I almost never use touch, except occasionally by accident. And the higher end ChromeBook laptops with touch have much lower battery life than the lower end models without touch.
Also, my understanding is to call from your Mac, your phone must be on the same wifi. Am I wrong?
Yes, they do need to be on the same wifi. See below.
Sometimes when your iPhone rings, it’s not where you are. Maybe it’s charging in another room. Or it’s buried in your backpack. But your Mac or iPad is sitting right there. Now you can make and receive phone calls on those devices as long as your iPhone running iOS 8 is on the same Wi-Fi network. Incoming calls show the caller’s name, number, and profile picture. Just click or swipe the notification to answer, ignore, or respond with a quick message. And making a phone call from your iPad or Mac is just as easy. Simply tap or click a phone number in Contacts, Calendar, or Safari. It all works with your existing iPhone number, so there’s nothing to set up. [source]
Why is Microsoft partnering with a Jeans brand? And how much did Docker pay to post a link to their content-free press release on the front page of Slashdot?
Slashdot Mirror
They're assholes who are about to get completely fucked and lose whatever kind of war they think they can win against Google and Apple.
Or they could just be using this alliance/app as leverage to try to get better rates than the standard Visa, or MasterCard rates. Not to mention, better access to the data of its own paying customers. After all, you can bet Google and Apple will try to resell ads and intelligence to the highest bidders, whoever those bidders might be, based purely on the data of the purchase history inside those stores.
A chip embedded in your arm is meaningless without context. Take for example, an Holocaust survivor with a tattooed number on his arm. Or take a person with a safety tattoo listing all the things he's deadly allergic to. Neither of those things are the same as a journalist being tattooed with a meaningless number on his arm.
If those ten volunteers were really serious about testing the technology in a negative light, they should just spent some time as prisoners in a real prison where everything gets tracked and counted by NFC readers at the very least. The Type II tag itself has such a small amount of memory, it can't really be used for any serious authentication outside of a closed loop system like a prison environment.
At best outside of prison use, this NFC tag could link to a shortened url, or contain such information as a Twitter handle, or a LinkedIn user name.
Did they really deceive the religious student organization? If they did, then the student organization can reject them if that's what they want to do. If the religious student organization still wants the conference to go on, despite its agenda, then the State school can't really do anything about it because it would be an obvious case of religious discrimination.
If students and faculty are really worried about the image of the school, they should just put on a competing event. That is, if they really care that much about it. Personally, I wouldn't, I care much more about sleeping-in on a Saturday morning.
Apple doesn't get a penny from the end user or from the retailer, so I suppose Google doesn't either. With Apple Pay the retailer pays the lowest rate available (percentages depend on how secure the payment method is; the more secure, the cheaper for the merchant).
This is how things are advertised to the merchants, it's cheaper for them if there is more security. The truth of the matter is that it's the retailer who is on the hook for fraud liability-wise, not the banks. And the real truth is that the rate a retailer has to pay is largely based on its bargaining power and the projected size of its card transactions.
Apple gets some money from the bank; the bank saves money by having less fraud.
Apple gets money from the bank for each transaction a user makes (that would be my guess). Apple also gets valuable information about purchase history and therefore can more closely serve targeted advertisements to those existing customers of the retailer by selling those ads to the retailer itself, or reselling those ads to its closest competitors, or to the upstream manufacturer/brand owner (or yet again, they could resell those ads to the competing manufacturers or to the competing brands).
And like I said previously, the bank doesn't save money by having less fraud, since it's really the retailers who carry all the liability for fraud (when it's not the consumer's fault). The reason a bank might want to do this is because letting an iPhone user use his own phone for transactions might increase the potential volume of transactions that a bank already makes for each customer. Not only that, but perhaps, Apple might also have made the deal to share more information with the banks/visa regarding their own users. With GPS tracking, car navigation, financial tagging by the user, call history, browser history, etc. Apple would be able to provide a much more complete picture to the banks of what users do when they buy things with their iPhone.
Yes, and that doesn't relate to what I said. There's nothing inherently wrong about living in fantasy. If they want to do that, I don't really care, and I'm not going to tell others whether or not they're living life to the fullest.
There is nothing inherently wrong with being obese, depressed, dying early, either I suppose.
It's just that I hope my own family members and my friends don't end up living that way.
I think "criminal histories" in this case is probably just a code-phrase for "smoked weed".
Lt. Col. Sharlene Pigg makes it sound like the military is relaxing its recruiting standards over criminal records because it needs "hackers".
But the truth of the matter is, the military has already relaxed its recruiting standards over criminal records. It did it for Vietnam and Korea when nobody else wanted to go. And it did it again ever since the war in Iraq got started, even formerly convicted felons have been able to get in (not just former weed smokers).
I'd say don't believe the hype regarding their need for hackers. The military is notoriously bad at matching recruits with jobs according to their existing technical abilities. If you want to do cyber warfare, get yourself a bachelor of art in something, anything, so that you get yourself recruited as an officer at the very least, to increase your chances -- not guarantee them mind you. If you enter the military without a degree because you like programming, or worse because you like playing video games, expect to be used as IED fodder in the Middle East, for the jobs that no one else wants to do.
instead of living life to the fullest in the real world
Have you considered that they are, in fact, doing that? Not everyone has the same interests.
Here is the disclaimer I used in my previous post:
...I'm just talking about the more extreme cases, the ones that have truly substituted fantasy worlds for their own realities.
Positive thinkers already get some of the mental-benefit of the task being complete.
I agree with this. This is like the guy who fantasizes about a woman he has a crush on without taking action. The more he fantasizes about that woman, the more he jerks off to her image, in the long-run -- the even less likely he'll be prepared to deal with her in real life. For the ladies, please reverse the genders into what I've just said, and the same will be true.
It's like people who eat empty calories instead of eating proper meals, or people who love losing themselves in power fantasies created by comic books, hollywood studios, and game studios, instead of living life to the fullest in the real world (not that everybody is like that, I'm just talking about the more extreme cases, the ones that have truly substituted fantasy worlds for their own realities).
That saps some of the motivation to finish, since they've already received part of the payoff.
That's true to an extent, but some would say that if you think that motivation is a pre-condition needed to get things done, then you've already created yourself an extra mental barrier that will prevent you from getting things done in the first place.
Action is not always the result of internal motivation. Just think of the last job you had, or the last difficult classes you've taken. Where you always motivated to work, or to study? Probably not, and yet, you probably still managed to show up to work and do it anyway, or study what needed to be studied. Often times, that extra motivation and that extra energy is not the pre-condition of the action, but the actual consequence of having taken that action in the first place.
Case in point, I used to attend public speaking clubs (Toastmasters clubs) late at night. Often times, I've had a long day already before attending those meetings and I was unmotivated to go to those meetings. And yet when I still went anyway, my energy levels went up, not down, as a result. So if there is a perfect time for taking action, it's when you're feeling unmotivated. That feeling of unmotivation should be your internal trigger, instead of being the excuse you tell yourself for doing nothing.
Agreed
It's hard to imagine any site allowing 1,000,000 bad guesses
It probably varies by site, but methinks anything over 100 or so would trigger a response
Even if the limit was 1000, same outcome
Apparently, this guy had no problem trying to guess 20,000+ passwords for any account on iCloud, a security issue he disclosed to Apple six months before CelebGate.
But again, this must have been user error.
The theft of the photographs, a statement from the company insisted, was not the result of “any breach in any of Apple’s systems including iCloud or Find my iPhone.”
The only thing Apple did wrong was not to educate its users about security.
“When I step back from this terrible scenario that happened and say what more could we have done, I think about the awareness piece,” he told the Wall Street Journal. “I think we have a responsibility to ratchet that up. That’s not really an engineering thing.”
T-Mobile I think gives you a free 200mb/month no matter what, so if you use cell network lightly that can be fantastic.
Do not trust T-Mobile on that promise. I bought two sim cards from T-mobile with the same promise, 200 mb/month "for life" and each sim card doesn't even need to be activated. I read the fine prints very carefully. That was true for about six months, then the sim cards stopped working.
I think T-Mobile just regretted having offered that deal. I would have complained, but I'm just too lazy to do so because I did get some service and I'm just out $40.
Overall, I still think T-Mobile is the least dishonest mobile carrier of the nationwide carriers. The second one is Sprint. Third is AT&T. And fourth is Verizon (even thought Verizon has the very best and widest coverage I've experienced in all the areas I frequent). I'm a mobile phone software developer, so I do get to experience many cell phone networks.
Well, the Russian government was not forced to pay any reimbursements for the survivors, as there were no physical disabilities as the result of using the agent on them.
dead people don't count as disabilities
To be fair, Putin might have changed that in 2013.
Now in Russia, the immediate families of terrorists are financially liable for the damages their family members caused. It's just too bad we don't have a law like that in the US, or the Bin Laden family would have had Osama Bin Laden killed, or imprisoned, as a financial precaution for preserving its billions of dollars.
What's the catchy term going to be for people who jump in front of autonomous vehicles and then sue?
Those would be called youtube idiot celebrities.
Because if you're going to jump in front of a car to try to scam someone, you better make sure that car doesn't have a dash cam that contradicts your story.
Don't forget the internet was invented by DARPA. Just like missiles and nukes and subs and carriers, the internet is a weapon. It is slow, but very sure to penetrate and destroy dictatorships and repressive governments worldwide. It's slow enough to say that we just deployed it recently. Even so, a number of governments have already fallen or been pressured by it; we see repressive regimes like China throwing all kinds of defenses up against it. I don't see how even China can stand against it for very long.
Assange gets this, at least on some level.
Assange gets this more than you know. A lot of what you've said about the internet could also be said of WikiLeaks. Just like missiles and nukes and subs and carriers, WikiLeaks is a weapon. It is slow, but very sure to penetrate and destroy dictatorships and repressive governments worldwide. It's slow enough to say that we just deployed it recently. Even so, a number of governments have already fallen or been pressured by it; we see repressive regimes like China throwing all kinds of defenses up against it. I don't see how even China can stand against it for very long.
That would mean America wins, and he sees America as the enemy. Oh well, suck it Assange. The business of America is business. The only real way to do business, is when people are free, and can spend their money on stuff they want. That's us winning.
No, when people are free, that can be us losing in some cases. If the Saudi family loses power, that's us losing. If Iran or Venezuela are allowed to sell their own oil to whomever they like. Again, that's us losing. And that's really the main problem of either the internet or wikileaks. Either of those tools are indiscriminate in the repressive governments they can pressure, and even take down.
You speak of free choice, the free market, and freedom, but that's really what WikiLeaks was originally all about. Knowing which government officials are corrupt protects the integrity of the free market. Knowing what our government does abroad with the military helps us make better informed decisions. It's all very simple really. Knowing that a politician's actions could be exposed to the people who voted him in is really one of the best ways of keeping that politician relatively honest. The same goes for dictators to some degree. After all, even if people can't vote someone out, they can still throw someone out (assuming, they have a big enough crowd behind them and their outrage is big enough).
You acting superior because you're from somewhere else is equivalent to an American acting superior because he's an American.
You missed his point. It's not because he is from China that he's not indoctrinated. It's because he's originally from China and left to come to America decades ago. In other words, he considers himself not indoctrinated because he claims he experienced two completely different countries.
So for instance, someone fluent in Japanese and living/working in Japan could have an equally eye-opening perspective if he had first been born and raised a significant part of his life in the US (at least, that would be my interpretation of the parent poster's opinion).
Also a Dice holding. Bitbucket or github are in better shape these days.
Wow! You guys are fast!!
I never expected someone to guess the right name of the project with only the two clues I've given.
Nice to see breakthrough research like this coming from a single-payer healthcare system like the UK. When people start saying that the only places that can afford groundbreaking medical research are the ones where the "customers" pay a fortune, it'll be good to be able to point them to things like this.
What you're assuming is not true. Rich and upper middle class people in the UK still pay a fortune for private healthcare. Sometimes that's the only way to get around the rationed care and the impossibly long waiting lists of the UK public healthcare system.
Also and more to the point, this particular research was funded by two foundations, both of which only seem to be funded through private corporations and private individuals.
The groundbreaking research was supported by the Nicholls Spinal Injury Foundation (NSIF) and the UK Stem Cell Foundation (UKSCF). UKSCF was set up in 2007 to speed up progress of promising stem cell research - the charity has to date contributed 2.5m. NSIF was set up by chef David Nicholls after his son Daniel was paralysed from the arms down in a swimming accident in 2003. To date the charity has given £1m to fund the research in London and a further £240,000 for the work in Poland.
Take a look at the list of corporate logos and the list of private patrons that seem to back the Nicholls Spinal Injury Foundation (NSIF). And take a look at the web site for the UK Stem Cell Foundation (UKSCF). For that second Foundation, it's less clear who the backers are, but still I don't see anything crediting the British government for providing any of the funds.
The scientists hope to treat another 10 patients, in Poland and Britain over the coming years, although that will depend on the research receiving funding.
Also on that note, I have no doubt that those two foundations will receive an avalanche of funding after this announcement (both private and public funding). That's usually how things go. Everybody will be wanting to be part of their success. Personally, I hope that this preliminary result isn't a scam. If this result is really true and can be replicated by other institutions, then it will mean the end of paralysis for many people. And I just hope that's true.
Disclaimer: Please do not assume that I'm against the idea of national single-payer systems. I'm actually for single-payer systems, but I just don't think that the UK system is a particularly good example. My family has experienced the French single payer system, the British single payer system, in addition to the pre-Obama US healthcare system, and putting aside my critic of the pre-Obama US healthcare system, I find the French single payer system far better than the British one (although, it can be extremely expensive and wasteful as well).
Yes, EventBrite would be my recommendation too.
If management really wants a custom solution, have someone create a custom web site/wiki/CRM that embeds or directs the user to the sign-up page on EventBrite. The end result will be a mashup of sorts, but it should work just fine, and even if the custom web site goes down on the day of the event because it's badly coded or whatever, the EventBrite sign-up page and related infrastructure will still work, so your event will still be able to go on as planned.
Do you even know what you just said? It knows when you go up and down floors. All this data mining, they know your address, your GPS coordinates, and which floor you're on. Maybe not down to the room number, but I bet they can deduce that through other means (steps taken, etc.). One has to wonder what all this information is going to eventually be used for, and perhaps what the use for it is already.
Yes, I realize what I've said, but I've done the privacy thing. I've rooted my Android phone and installed a privacy-focused ROM, but that just ended up drastically limiting my user experience and annoyed the hell out of me. I'm not doing that again.
The corporations can overthrow the government and throw you in Gitmo. I'm not going to be the one to stop them. I like my comforts and my conveniences far too much to do anything about it.
Actually, the barometer on my phone is pretty good. Absent a radical atmospheric change, it roughly knows when I've climbed one floor in an elevator for instance. I doubt that the gyroscope sensors could be giving it this level of information. In any case, by itself this information is almost useless, but when correlated with other data points from other sensors, that's when application developers could use that information to infer much more useful information.
For instance, with this kind of information, a car navigation app might be able to realize more quickly that you didn't take the on-ramp you were supposed to take. Or it could infer that you made it halfway through a tunnel. Or it could tell you on what floor you've parked your car (assuming, it could calculate out the atmospheric information it could obtain from other sources). Etc. The same goes for health apps. Walking on a flat surface vs. walking uphill makes a world of difference in the number of calories you're burning. I personally very much doubt that the cheap pedometers you can get at the local drugstore for less than 10 dollars can tell the difference between a flat surface and uphill.
Danger Zone!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
This isn't about trolling.
This is about abusive, manipulative, disruptive and often threatening behavior that would not be tolerated off-line in the name of free speech --- because it is the enemy of free speech.
Free speech cannot survive in an atmosphere of fear.
Free speech cannot survive when speakers are shouted down, bullied and hounded off stage.
Free speech cannot survive the mob.
No, this law is mostly about drinking and tweeting, and tweeting racist things as a result.
In the UK, the maximum penalty for someone drinking and driving, when a life isn't actually lost as a result, is up 6 months in jail. However, if you happen to be drinking and tweeting (and not driving), then that maximum penalty is multiplied by four.
Free speech cannot survive when speakers are shouted down, bullied and hounded off stage.
Free speech cannot survive the mob.
May be, but not in the tweeting cases prosecuted by the Crown. In each case, the mob sided with the target of the tweets, not the offender. And of course, we're not talking about online school bullying with this particular law. If this law was aimed at stopping school bullying, there would be a provision for underaged offenders, which there isn't. And it would be applied to those school cases, which as of now it hasn't.
...that would not be tolerated off-line in the name of free speech
That's a nice idea, but you haven't spend any time around drunk people. When a drunk person gets belligerent, you throw them out of the premises, or if you're not the owner of the premises, you walk away from them. Throwing them in jail is the last possible resort, only to be used, when that person is a danger to others, or a danger to himself (like when he or she is hitting other people, or trying to drive a car).
Throwing trolls in jail isn't going to solve the problem of trolls. For one thing, there will still be people trolling from outside the UK (they will do so just because they can, as a taunt against the British authorities). And for a second thing, people aren't going to stop drinking and tweeting, even inside the UK, so the angry judges and politicians are likely to be even more frustrated with the results and come up with even more draconian measures.
How did I miss this halcyon era when Internet ads were "fun and informative"?
The rentals section of Craigslist and their jobs offered section are actually useful and informative for the users (although admittedly, I don't think those sections are considered "fun" unless you include the free sections of Craigslist) . Those two sections, rentals and jobs, require money to post each listing. If those paid sections didn't have such a barrier to entry, then they would be swamped with spam and duplicate posts, even more spam and duplicate posts than other sections on Craigslist already have.
But aside from Craigslist, I'm not aware of any company that has made paid advertisements useful for the actual users. And since Snapchat has already accepted 50 million of dollars for its C Series funding from a well known hedge fund, Snapchat will be required to become the next Facebook, or die trying, and in my personal opinion that never bodes well for the users.
ChromeOS on the other hand, is made for the desktop paradigm of multiple simultaneous overlapping windows, with controls that are sized for mouse/touchpad usage, not direct touch usage. Sure, Chromebooks have large touchpads now for gesture controls that are kinda sorta similar to what you get on touchscreen devices, but I know I'd much rather use a touchpad than drag my grubby mitts all over the screen, leaving greasy fingerprints.
And the reverse is true as well. There are several ChromeOS with touch on the market right now, and I own one of them, but the problem is that ChromeOS is useless for the touch paradigm.
It's not really the greasy fingerprints that annoy me. For me, it's the fact that I almost never use touch, except occasionally by accident. And the higher end ChromeBook laptops with touch have much lower battery life than the lower end models without touch.
Also, my understanding is to call from your Mac, your phone must be on the same wifi. Am I wrong?
Yes, they do need to be on the same wifi. See below.
Sometimes when your iPhone rings, it’s not where you are. Maybe it’s charging in another room. Or it’s buried in your backpack. But your Mac or iPad is sitting right there. Now you can make and receive phone calls on those devices as long as your iPhone running iOS 8 is on the same Wi-Fi network. Incoming calls show the caller’s name, number, and profile picture. Just click or swipe the notification to answer, ignore, or respond with a quick message. And making a phone call from your iPad or Mac is just as easy. Simply tap or click a phone number in Contacts, Calendar, or Safari. It all works with your existing iPhone number, so there’s nothing to set up.
[source]
Why is Microsoft partnering with a Jeans brand? And how much did Docker pay to post a link to their content-free press release on the front page of Slashdot?