Ok, I'll bite. Here are the direct quotes of Conaway (a Republican):
"Bottom line: Russians did commit active measures against our elections in '16, and we think they'll do that in the future," Conaway said. "It's clear they sowed discord in our elections.... But we couldn't establish the same conclusions the CIA did that they specifically wanted to help Trump."
Is that what you meant by "entirely false"? Plus, that doesn't really explain why the Republican majority shut down their investigation so quickly (unless they're trying to hide something). After all, nobody tried to shut down the 911 commission prematurely, when no evidence was found that US officials had colluded with Bin Laden. After all, the investigation was started to investigate "Russian Meddling", not specifically "Trump Collusion".
I wonder, when did that change for the Republicans?
And just to put things in perspective, even if you don't think that an attack on our leadership process an act of war (which is kind of silly if you don't think that), the 9/11 attack at the time cost us ~3,000 casualties, but in the case of Crimea, the Russian incursion has already cost our ally ~10,000 lives.
And please notice the weasel word "specifically" in "that [the Russians] specifically wanted to help Trump." Of course, we already know that's not true. The Russians were trying to help both Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump (although Donald Trump is the only one that retweeted their stories).
And of course, that still doesn't explain why they'd shut down their own investigation so quickly, when everybody else, the Mueller team, Trump's own Justice Department, the FBI, the CIA, etc. are raising even more alarms than ever before at a more frequent rate than ever before.
So this is how companies who’ve stripped away every vestige of privacy from their employees can pretend to give it back, eh? I bet there are cameras monitoring who goes in, and for how long, though.
There is no need for cameras or time card machines. Those are surveillance tools from the 90s.
Between the open floor plan and all the glass walls, it's easy to know who is working less 80 hours a week. And yes, you can check your Facebook, do all your Christmas shopping online, play Clash of whatever, play minesweeper, check your stocks, read the news, and watch cat videos, but please do all of that from the phone booths/semi-closets or from the reception / kitchen / play areas. There is even a stationary Chromebook or two near the reception area for those reasons.
And of course, the Reddit CEO claims no responsibility in this, but who is he kidding.
With rules like "No criticism of Donald Trump allowed" in some of these subs as the #1 rule to follow, it means that if you're genuinely trying to correct a piece of false information, the mods of these subs will automatically ban you for it.
Think about it for a minute. If someone were to equate Donald Trump to be a god-like person on one these subs (like folks frequently do in North Korea with their great dear leader), or if someone were to defame Hillary Clinton and claim that she ate human babies as part of some devil-worshipping ritual, and if you were to subsequently trying to correct that misinformation or even question it, your attempt would only get you banned from the sub in question.
Because this is the way Reddit is set up right now. Reddit, in its infinite wisdom to maximize its profits, allows sub creators to create echo chambers where information only ever flows in one direction. And of course, then the Reddit CEO claims no complicity in this.
Yes, but since the company is based in the US and there are advantages to be in the US. It may be easier to declare the company a failure, sell off its assets, restart it under a different trade name and restart with a different CEO.
And if that still doesn't work, the company could always sell out to Verizon, I hear they have a great relationship with the head of the FCC.
I agree with your first point. But does it even say "porn provider" or are you making this up?
I would think "net neutrality" doesn't apply in this case because "net neutrality" says nothing about government intervention (only the Constitution does that).
If you want to argue about the spirit of "net neutrality", then you're getting into dicy territory. "net neutrality" is a complicated enough topic by itself. Let's not make it more complicated. "net neutrality" clearly doesn't apply. If we want to call the RI legislators names, we don't have to call them hypocrites, we can just call them feel-good-idiots for creating a law that will eventually get shot down because of very obvious reasons.
What happened to that wounded security guard who was first to confront the gunman in Las Vegas? Shouldn't he be the one getting the 'courage award' from the NRA?
Aji Pai will be getting millions for fucking over the American people. And now, he's getting around the clock protection from the Secret Service. What he did doesn't require courage.
That security guard in Vegas, on the other hand, was probably getting paid barely above minimum wage for confronting a gunman with multiple assault weapons.
If I were you, I would try to avoid over-engineering the visualizations.
With that in mind, I'd suggest 3-D Maps with Excel (but not Visio). https://support.office.com/en-... It's part of Microsoft Office 360 and as a non-profit, you should be able to get a discount for the monthly subscription.
Sure, the Republican party is funding the Damore lawsuit, but this lawsuit, the one started by this transgender person, I doubt that's being funded by the Republican party.
That last lawsuit against Google could be funded by Google against itself for all I know, to show that they're not showing bias in firing people since people from both sides are suing them.
I'm already crying because of the results of the last fuck up the FCC made several years ago, radio station consolidations.
At the time, I didn't have an opinion one way or another, but the quality and the diversity of content has only gone downhill since then. And now, in our pay-to-play world, the music we hear on the radio is just one massive advertisement that plays over and over again until we're brainwashed into liking it.
His product is his company, not the services it provides. His customers are the future IPO investors, not the riders. And the more ridiculously ambitious you make a project, the more money you can demand for it during your IPO.
And by the way, small commercial jets and helicopters do exist already. For instance, you can jump on a small scheduled shared jet from San Jose to Los Angeles without having to go through a huge airport and without having to deal with all the TSA bullshit. https://www.jetsuitex.com/dest... Or if you're in the middle of nowhere in Canada or Alaska, small airplane taxis are already hugely important to you as well.
And now, it's just a matter of making jets and helicopters as easy to fly as drones to make the price of the pilots as low as possible (that is, until those pilots can be fully automated and replaced down the line).
But even if that market doesn't really materialize for Uber, that doesn't matter. Their main goal is their IPO. And if they mention flying taxis, that means they'll get lots of free publicity from everyone and that also means they can ask for an extra x number of billion dollars, which will inflate their market cap even more.
I agree. The system in Sweden is idiotic. It needs to quickly close this loophole, and especially since it takes several weeks to get the medical results back on determining one's age, Sweden needs to promptly fly back anyone who lied about their age directly to their home country (to at least make an example of them).
That being said, I'm not sure if this blog you linked to is true. And if true, I'm not too concerned about Ahmad only doing two years. He only killed another guy who had previously raped him (assuming the story is true and assuming Google translate translated the blog post accurately). I don't think he should be put in prison for 12 years for that. And the other guy he killed was also technically 17 years old (but that too is probably a fabrication because everyone else thought that he was an adult too).
...he should have known he was playing with fire by making those pirated discs, even if he did it for a noble purpose.
No, you didn't read the article carefully enough. Please try again.
Those were backup disks. They didn't contain a Microsoft key and they couldn't function without a valid Microsoft key.
For old windows computers, the Microsoft key is located on a sticker on the computer itself. And the backup OS can be downloaded legally and for free from Dell (and other vendors). Then the user just needs to plop the disk in and enter the valid Microsoft key that came with the computer.
Your comment regarding Linux is well taken, and I like Linux, but if a customer only wants Windows restored on an old machine and already owns a valid license of Windows for that specific machine. Putting Linux on it instead, against the customer's explicit instructions and consent, would only upset the customer and would eventually get your business shut down after you did it to enough people.
The guy's only mistake is the way he labeled the disks. That was his only mistake. And yes, he should stop doing that, and maybe pay a small fine. But throwing a guy in prison for so long, for such a minor technicality, is overkill and cruel. He provided those disks mostly at cost. He didn't misrepresent what was inside of them. He didn't commit fraud. He didn't steal anything. He didn't pirate anything. He only tried to provide a convenience for his customers.
I agree about the confusion. Also, let's apply the "Google" test to it. "You don't know what this is? Let me bing it for you." "You don't know what this is? Let me 'Microsoft Search' it for you." The second one doesn't roll off the tongue as much.
In any case, to say that Microsoft has improved its reputation means that this CNET contributor is either completely out of touch with current reality, or is being paid to shill for Microsoft.
Ok, the Trump association, I can sort of understand.
But putting out of business a tabloid (with other questionable practices) that published a full sex tape of a celebrity without his consent (a sex tape which had no redeeming news value of any kind, other than the fact that some guy gave consent for his wife to have sex with a celebrity while he was videotaping it).
How is that bad? Is the porn industry in LA really upset over this? Or is it the tabloids or the papparrazis?
What's so controversial about having a policy that says you need to not be jerks to each other?
Remember the school who suspended a teenager for two days because she was supposedly "inciting violence" with her anti-bullying video criticizing the school. That's what we're talking about here.
With overly vague but very strict written rules, that means the people in charge of an organization are free to interpret and reinterpret the rules however it suits them.
For instance, let's say x number of years from now, a FreeBSD committee chairman/president starts padding his/her expense reports with very large unrelated personal expenses, or holds a new election of board/committee members without telling anyone else about it but for a few of his/her personal friends.
Would the rules below be used to silence / banish the members who are asking too many questions?
Continued one-on-one communication after requests to cease.
Publication of non-harassing private communication without consent.
Harassing photography or recording, including logging online activity for harassment purposes.
Yes, you can bet they will. It's not that those rules necessarily have bad intentions.
I can certainly see them being used against stalkers and bullies. It's just that those rules are so overly vague, they will certainly be abused if/when a bad actor, or bad actors, ever reach power.
People checking their email at red lights don't want to get honked if they don't respond fast enough to a green light.
So this makes them more nervous, more reliant on their peripheral vision, and more likely to gun the car forward incorrectly if a dash of green light appears in their peripheral vision even it's coming for a different lane or if it's pointing in the wrong direction.
We used Google maps and Waze when we had cell service and the Google maps are much much better. And free... as long as you have cellular service.
Welcome to the 21st century!
We're just surprised it took you this long.
The only people still using old maps are drivers with big trucks and double-decker buses that don't want to get stuck under a bridge, but even that's becoming a problem since they're taking too long to update them after constructions.
Question: How is it that Google maps are head and shoulders better than Garmin maps and Garmin charges out the wazoo???
Have you noticed? A similar tension exists between traditional encyclopedias and Wikipedia.
On one hand, you have business owners who believe in crowdsourcing and who believe the risks crowdsourcing brings can be mitigated and corrected by the crowd itself. On the other hand, you have a proud company like NavTeq (that Garmin relies on) that learned to dominate the mapping industry and gobble up its competitors all throughout the 80s and the 90s by only using professional map makers and professional data entry specialists.
Here, the true master of map crowdsourcing (aside from OpenStreetMaps) was the Israeli startup called Waze, which Google eventually purchased three or four years ago for 3 billion dollars. This is not to say that Google was bad at crowdsourcing either. Google was still lightyears ahead of NavTeq in that area, long before it even purchased Waze (also, you have to keep in mind that Waze only collated real-time car-related map data through crowdsourcing, while Google had a much grander vision of collecting all kinds of mapping data).
Then, in addition to crowdsourcing and using everyone's personal location data who use their maps app or their Android operating system, there is also the fact that Google uses non-mapping professionals to drive Google cars, pilot robot submarines, pilot planes, drones, ride bicycles, hike, etc. and accumulate terabytes of video data, wifi hotspot locations, cell tower locations, GPS coordinates, etc., all of which it can quickly gobble up and process through automation and image recognition (and not manual data entry). So I suppose that's the second part of Google's expertise, automation. Proper automation is a core requirement of being able to use cheaper labor to collect and process large amounts of data. But proper automation is also just as important, if not more important, for collecting and cleaning up the data they collect through even cheaper crowdsourcing.
Slashdot Mirror
Ok, I'll bite. Here are the direct quotes of Conaway (a Republican):
"Bottom line: Russians did commit active measures against our elections in '16, and we think they'll do that in the future," Conaway said. "It's clear they sowed discord in our elections. ... But we couldn't establish the same conclusions the CIA did that they specifically wanted to help Trump."
Is that what you meant by "entirely false"? Plus, that doesn't really explain why the Republican majority shut down their investigation so quickly (unless they're trying to hide something). After all, nobody tried to shut down the 911 commission prematurely, when no evidence was found that US officials had colluded with Bin Laden. After all, the investigation was started to investigate "Russian Meddling", not specifically "Trump Collusion".
I wonder, when did that change for the Republicans?
And just to put things in perspective, even if you don't think that an attack on our leadership process an act of war (which is kind of silly if you don't think that), the 9/11 attack at the time cost us ~3,000 casualties, but in the case of Crimea, the Russian incursion has already cost our ally ~10,000 lives.
And please notice the weasel word "specifically" in "that [the Russians] specifically wanted to help Trump." Of course, we already know that's not true. The Russians were trying to help both Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump (although Donald Trump is the only one that retweeted their stories).
And of course, that still doesn't explain why they'd shut down their own investigation so quickly, when everybody else, the Mueller team, Trump's own Justice Department, the FBI, the CIA, etc. are raising even more alarms than ever before at a more frequent rate than ever before.
So this is how companies who’ve stripped away every vestige of privacy from their employees can pretend to give it back, eh? I bet there are cameras monitoring who goes in, and for how long, though.
There is no need for cameras or time card machines. Those are surveillance tools from the 90s.
Between the open floor plan and all the glass walls, it's easy to know who is working less 80 hours a week. And yes, you can check your Facebook, do all your Christmas shopping online, play Clash of whatever, play minesweeper, check your stocks, read the news, and watch cat videos, but please do all of that from the phone booths/semi-closets or from the reception / kitchen / play areas. There is even a stationary Chromebook or two near the reception area for those reasons.
And of course, the Reddit CEO claims no responsibility in this, but who is he kidding.
With rules like "No criticism of Donald Trump allowed" in some of these subs as the #1 rule to follow, it means that if you're genuinely trying to correct a piece of false information, the mods of these subs will automatically ban you for it.
Think about it for a minute. If someone were to equate Donald Trump to be a god-like person on one these subs (like folks frequently do in North Korea with their great dear leader), or if someone were to defame Hillary Clinton and claim that she ate human babies as part of some devil-worshipping ritual, and if you were to subsequently trying to correct that misinformation or even question it, your attempt would only get you banned from the sub in question.
Because this is the way Reddit is set up right now. Reddit, in its infinite wisdom to maximize its profits, allows sub creators to create echo chambers where information only ever flows in one direction. And of course, then the Reddit CEO claims no complicity in this.
Yes, but since the company is based in the US and there are advantages to be in the US. It may be easier to declare the company a failure, sell off its assets, restart it under a different trade name and restart with a different CEO.
And if that still doesn't work, the company could always sell out to Verizon, I hear they have a great relationship with the head of the FCC.
No, this will have an impact, but mostly on the people who insist on building on eroding soil near the water.
Personally, I have no sympathy for those people anyway. And I just wish that our tax dollars didn't subsidize their insurance.
In which case, they didn't lose the money for sure.
They could also claim that their accounts got hacked but through a different attack vector.
I agree with your first point. But does it even say "porn provider" or are you making this up?
I would think "net neutrality" doesn't apply in this case because "net neutrality" says nothing about government intervention (only the Constitution does that).
If you want to argue about the spirit of "net neutrality", then you're getting into dicy territory. "net neutrality" is a complicated enough topic by itself. Let's not make it more complicated. "net neutrality" clearly doesn't apply. If we want to call the RI legislators names, we don't have to call them hypocrites, we can just call them feel-good-idiots for creating a law that will eventually get shot down because of very obvious reasons.
Is your comment replying to the topic of quantum computers? Or are you talking about something else like flying cars?
Why would quantum computers need batteries? Wouldn't they be plugged in into the grid?
What happened to that wounded security guard who was first to confront the gunman in Las Vegas? Shouldn't he be the one getting the 'courage award' from the NRA?
Aji Pai will be getting millions for fucking over the American people. And now, he's getting around the clock protection from the Secret Service. What he did doesn't require courage.
That security guard in Vegas, on the other hand, was probably getting paid barely above minimum wage for confronting a gunman with multiple assault weapons.
If I were you, I would try to avoid over-engineering the visualizations.
With that in mind, I'd suggest 3-D Maps with Excel (but not Visio).
https://support.office.com/en-...
It's part of Microsoft Office 360 and as a non-profit, you should be able to get a discount for the monthly subscription.
Or you could use a map add-on with Google Sheets.
https://chrome.google.com/webs...
https://www.makeuseof.com/tag/...
You could even draw or upload your own private map as a layer.
https://www.makeuseof.com/tag/...
I know you're joking, but you should take a look at twitch when you have a chance. You'll find a number of developers on there.
Sheesh. Please just read the article. There is no need to speculate.
Sure, the Republican party is funding the Damore lawsuit, but this lawsuit, the one started by this transgender person, I doubt that's being funded by the Republican party.
That last lawsuit against Google could be funded by Google against itself for all I know, to show that they're not showing bias in firing people since people from both sides are suing them.
Maybe for you, but for me, I drive a lot and my internet is not truly unlimited, and I can't afford satellite radio.
No need to wait that long.
I'm already crying because of the results of the last fuck up the FCC made several years ago, radio station consolidations.
At the time, I didn't have an opinion one way or another, but the quality and the diversity of content has only gone downhill since then. And now, in our pay-to-play world, the music we hear on the radio is just one massive advertisement that plays over and over again until we're brainwashed into liking it.
This CEO is looking dumber and dumber.
His product is his company, not the services it provides. His customers are the future IPO investors, not the riders. And the more ridiculously ambitious you make a project, the more money you can demand for it during your IPO.
And by the way, small commercial jets and helicopters do exist already. For instance, you can jump on a small scheduled shared jet from San Jose to Los Angeles without having to go through a huge airport and without having to deal with all the TSA bullshit.
https://www.jetsuitex.com/dest... Or if you're in the middle of nowhere in Canada or Alaska, small airplane taxis are already hugely important to you as well.
And now, it's just a matter of making jets and helicopters as easy to fly as drones to make the price of the pilots as low as possible (that is, until those pilots can be fully automated and replaced down the line).
But even if that market doesn't really materialize for Uber, that doesn't matter. Their main goal is their IPO. And if they mention flying taxis, that means they'll get lots of free publicity from everyone and that also means they can ask for an extra x number of billion dollars, which will inflate their market cap even more.
I agree. The system in Sweden is idiotic. It needs to quickly close this loophole, and especially since it takes several weeks to get the medical results back on determining one's age, Sweden needs to promptly fly back anyone who lied about their age directly to their home country (to at least make an example of them).
That being said, I'm not sure if this blog you linked to is true. And if true, I'm not too concerned about Ahmad only doing two years. He only killed another guy who had previously raped him (assuming the story is true and assuming Google translate translated the blog post accurately). I don't think he should be put in prison for 12 years for that. And the other guy he killed was also technically 17 years old (but that too is probably a fabrication because everyone else thought that he was an adult too).
...he should have known he was playing with fire by making those pirated discs, even if he did it for a noble purpose.
No, you didn't read the article carefully enough. Please try again.
Those were backup disks. They didn't contain a Microsoft key and they couldn't function without a valid Microsoft key.
For old windows computers, the Microsoft key is located on a sticker on the computer itself. And the backup OS can be downloaded legally and for free from Dell (and other vendors). Then the user just needs to plop the disk in and enter the valid Microsoft key that came with the computer.
Your comment regarding Linux is well taken, and I like Linux, but if a customer only wants Windows restored on an old machine and already owns a valid license of Windows for that specific machine. Putting Linux on it instead, against the customer's explicit instructions and consent, would only upset the customer and would eventually get your business shut down after you did it to enough people.
The guy's only mistake is the way he labeled the disks. That was his only mistake. And yes, he should stop doing that, and maybe pay a small fine. But throwing a guy in prison for so long, for such a minor technicality, is overkill and cruel. He provided those disks mostly at cost. He didn't misrepresent what was inside of them. He didn't commit fraud. He didn't steal anything. He didn't pirate anything. He only tried to provide a convenience for his customers.
I agree about the confusion. Also, let's apply the "Google" test to it.
"You don't know what this is? Let me bing it for you."
"You don't know what this is? Let me 'Microsoft Search' it for you."
The second one doesn't roll off the tongue as much.
In any case, to say that Microsoft has improved its reputation means that this CNET contributor is either completely out of touch with current reality, or is being paid to shill for Microsoft.
Personally, I've never hated Microsoft is as much as I do now.
I hope Microsoft and its lawyers go to hell!
Ok, the Trump association, I can sort of understand.
But putting out of business a tabloid (with other questionable practices) that published a full sex tape of a celebrity without his consent (a sex tape which had no redeeming news value of any kind, other than the fact that some guy gave consent for his wife to have sex with a celebrity while he was videotaping it).
How is that bad? Is the porn industry in LA really upset over this? Or is it the tabloids or the papparrazis?
What's so controversial about having a policy that says you need to not be jerks to each other?
Remember the school who suspended a teenager for two days because she was supposedly "inciting violence" with her anti-bullying video criticizing the school. That's what we're talking about here.
With overly vague but very strict written rules, that means the people in charge of an organization are free to interpret and reinterpret the rules however it suits them.
For instance, let's say x number of years from now, a FreeBSD committee chairman/president starts padding his/her expense reports with very large unrelated personal expenses, or holds a new election of board/committee members without telling anyone else about it but for a few of his/her personal friends.
Would the rules below be used to silence / banish the members who are asking too many questions?
Continued one-on-one communication after requests to cease.
Publication of non-harassing private communication without consent.
Harassing photography or recording, including logging online activity for harassment purposes.
Yes, you can bet they will. It's not that those rules necessarily have bad intentions.
I can certainly see them being used against stalkers and bullies. It's just that those rules are so overly vague, they will certainly be abused if/when a bad actor, or bad actors, ever reach power.
Google doesn't sell user data. It sells ads instead. User data is its asset.
It's only going to rent the use of its asset, not sell it outright.
People checking their email at red lights don't want to get honked if they don't respond fast enough to a green light.
So this makes them more nervous, more reliant on their peripheral vision, and more likely to gun the car forward incorrectly if a dash of green light appears in their peripheral vision even it's coming for a different lane or if it's pointing in the wrong direction.
...says the unionized train engineer.
We used Google maps and Waze when we had cell service and the Google maps are much much better. And free... as long as you have cellular service.
Welcome to the 21st century!
We're just surprised it took you this long.
The only people still using old maps are drivers with big trucks and double-decker buses that don't want to get stuck under a bridge, but even that's becoming a problem since they're taking too long to update them after constructions.
Question: How is it that Google maps are head and shoulders better than Garmin maps and Garmin charges out the wazoo???
Have you noticed? A similar tension exists between traditional encyclopedias and Wikipedia.
On one hand, you have business owners who believe in crowdsourcing and who believe the risks crowdsourcing brings can be mitigated and corrected by the crowd itself. On the other hand, you have a proud company like NavTeq (that Garmin relies on) that learned to dominate the mapping industry and gobble up its competitors all throughout the 80s and the 90s by only using professional map makers and professional data entry specialists.
Here, the true master of map crowdsourcing (aside from OpenStreetMaps) was the Israeli startup called Waze, which Google eventually purchased three or four years ago for 3 billion dollars. This is not to say that Google was bad at crowdsourcing either. Google was still lightyears ahead of NavTeq in that area, long before it even purchased Waze (also, you have to keep in mind that Waze only collated real-time car-related map data through crowdsourcing, while Google had a much grander vision of collecting all kinds of mapping data).
Then, in addition to crowdsourcing and using everyone's personal location data who use their maps app or their Android operating system, there is also the fact that Google uses non-mapping professionals to drive Google cars, pilot robot submarines, pilot planes, drones, ride bicycles, hike, etc. and accumulate terabytes of video data, wifi hotspot locations, cell tower locations, GPS coordinates, etc., all of which it can quickly gobble up and process through automation and image recognition (and not manual data entry). So I suppose that's the second part of Google's expertise, automation. Proper automation is a core requirement of being able to use cheaper labor to collect and process large amounts of data. But proper automation is also just as important, if not more important, for collecting and cleaning up the data they collect through even cheaper crowdsourcing.