I just don't trust a free service provider to care too much about my data.
So you prefer the service provider to buy your trust by making you pay them money. Hmm.
Whether or not you directly pay them do not forget you are still their source of income as their advertisers will pay nothing without you. If they piss off an advertiser there are likely hundreds waiting more waiting for an ad spot. However, if they piss of a user, that user will tell more users and much more will be lost. Their business model walks a thin line of supplying what the customer wants (ermanent personal information remaining permanent and personal included).
It's legal terrorism at its finest. The potential for a slap in the face is supposed to keep you from avoiding their totalitarian business model. It's not quite civil disobedience because the law is being broken, however no one is placed in any sort of physical (or even financial) danger (except of course for their shoddy business practices).
My 'terrorism' label could be proven by whether or not they actually take people to court. If not, it's more of a hit-and-run situation.
And let's not forget why we call it stealing...
We call it stealing because the original owner no longer has it. No wait...
We call it stealing because.. umm.. they don't get money?
Oh right we call it stealing because the people who made it need money... no wait..
Oh I remember, we call it stealing because some CEO someplace needs to buy a yatched. Yeah, that sounds right.
Disclaimer: This is a joke. Taking this seriously offensively makes you look like an idiot. If you had a girlfriend she'd dump you.
so you want to punish the people who have worked hard their entire lives to earn money...
HAHAHAHhahahahahahahahah!!
Sorry
heh.. heh... AHAHAHahhahahahahahahhahahahaha
This is too much. You're hurting me dude!
OMG!! you can work hard and make a great life for yourself
I just crapped myself laughing. Send me $20 for a new pair of jeans.
Here are some facts for you. 20 years ago 2/3rds of American companies payed taxes, the rest were exempt after breaks, etc. Today 30% of American companies pay taxes-- mostly small business. 2 of the fortune (I believe it's fortune's list, not sure) top 100 companies pay taxes.
How much more redistibution of wealth do you want in this country? Should the top 40% pay 95% of the taxes? The top 30%? The top 20%?
For starters the bottom 40% should pay no tax. Do remember that a family with $40,000/year is much poorer than a single person with $40,000/year. Also remember any given dollar amount gets you different things in different states (this is why taxes are complicated) such as apartment prices.
Up from that tax needs to increase accordingly. Anything above normal is luxury so you can do something like take $40,000 (Arbitrary number, not defending it), subtract it from the income, then pay based on a scale that starts at 20% up to 50% as income increases. Again, arbitrary numbers.
The majority of rich people don't hoard their money. That idea is an untrue stereotype. The majority invest it, start new companies, hire more employees, expand their businesses, buy expensive cars, boats, homes, etc. and, in general, keep the economy moving
Actually, yes they do. This is way top-down economics doesn't really work. There is a "propensity to consume". It is basically the measure of how much of a dollar someone would spend if you gave them a dollar. A propensity of.7 would mean 30 cents saved per 70 cents spend. The propensity to consume is very much inversely proportional to income, mean, the more you make the lower % of it you'll spend. This makes complete sense if you apply a little brain power. If an economy starts to weaken propensity goes down, investing stops from the rich boys, and things plummet.
That being said there's one other key: Rich people don't run, help, or even support the economy. They make up the vast minority of purchases. Those that do buy things are usually through businesses with tax exemptions. Tax exemptions pass congress all the time for various industries. This is known as corruption.
Sounds overly dramatic for starters. But what to address?
Is what is between you and a police officer public? That's being implicitly stated in the rather swayed headline. They are implying anything you tell a police officer the officer is free to tell to everyone.
Privacy advocates aren't fighting the battle I want them to be fighting. Police are here to protect me. I'll tell them I'm allergic to penicillin so I won't die when an ambulance comes to save me. I'll tell them who my parents are so they can contact them. I'll tell them every last thing about me if I'm in trouble or someone else is and it can help them.
I also expect that information to be completely confidential. It's still private, just a new person or people has/have been included in my privacy. I would never expect anyone to violate my confidentiality and to do so in any profession usually causes job loss. If a police officer pulls me over and asks for my mother's maiden name right off the bat you're damn straight I'll give it to him. I haven't a clue how much disruption I could possibly cause by not giving it. I might be in a car that matches the description of a criminal and myself as well, yet my ability to simply roll off my mother's maiden name would be enough to convince the officer otherwise.
The price of freedom is eternal vigilance. Vigilance, being an inconvenience at times, but never a rule. My bottom line is don't be an ass. With a bit of cooperation every now and then everyone is safer.
I am an advocate for not having my head shot off by a police officer thinking I have a gun. I am an advocate for being able to walk in a mall knowing that know one around me has a bomb. I am willing to be inconvenienced for this security. What's private, stay's private, in that my life is not affected by anyone new knowing anything. Yes, new people will know more intimate details about me, but those really aren't mine to unless I am willing to give up all of society.
I know exactly what the negative replies to this would be, but go ahead anyway. Someone might learn something just yet.
I really do hope the courts do something about this passive signing away of your rights. I call it passive because the agreements define for themselves what agreeing to them means, so they are by nature fraudulent. So buying a product is a legal signature? So is opening a CD case, or installing software? They can put all the "Read the EULA"'s they want, but I don't see how any specific number of warnings suddenly merits compliance by law.
By reading this you acknowledge my right to use your computer to research how better to write future comments. Oh yeah you have to give me your stuff too if you break our agreement. By reading this sentence you have broken our agreement. The next bag of potato chips you open signifies your compliance to turn over all properties that can be used to drink out of.
Seeing all the things Shatner is in right now I'd bet he'd be willing to do it himself for minimum wage... That still doesn't solve your basic complaint though.
Just say 20 years from now I am on my quantum fandangle computer that does sub-atomic calculations, what happens when background radiation hits the processor and flips a few 1s and 0s?
This happens now, actually. We can't stop it entirely, but we can lower the chance that it happens in our modern chips. The funny thing about this problem is that it's usually not a problem. Take a Pentium 4 and flip some bit somewhere in it. Worst case is it'll cause the system to halt (parity checks prevent most bad data from leaving the chip). However just as easily it may take literally years of running the chip without reset for you to ever see the error that was caused, or never. I don't know about you but I don't particularly care if my 286 compatibility goes awry. Even under a fully utilized chip (performing common instructions non-stop) the majority of the chip is usually not be being used. Basically not only does a bit have to be hit, it has to flip. It also has to be at the correct part of the clock cycle such that its value will be read and make it to the next flop. That area of the chip must also be being used. Internal protocols used may even be prepared for mismatches such as this, causing things just to be redone.
Intel and another corporation (Motorola?) recently announced a cutback in lead in their designs so I don't know if they'll put a big chunk of it on for quantum computers. Perhaps they won't have a choice.
Re:"vows to mend his ways by teaching others about
on
Spammer Apologizes
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Saddam Hussein is going to do a few lectures about genocide (against) in exchange he'll get two years probation.
When traveling west on I90 (NY state thruway) towards Rochester I saw a giant white blimp that looked a lot like this. It was south of the interstate and seemed to be moving with a nice amount of speed. I think they were playing with it because the nose kept dipping then going back up. This was on June 4th. I don't remember but I think it was before Syracuse. Did anyone in the area see this? Was it just a regular blimp? I remember it looking like these photos.
I have to blame our justice system for this one, not that I can think of anything better. When you have two sides arguing in a court room not even being allowed to represent themselves lest be labeled stupid, the case turns into a drama production by lawyers and witnesses who care less for truth and more for victory and money.
If my view if someone is found guilty, any lawyer representing them must answer to perjury charges depending on the circumstances (as well as the defendant). This is also quite plausible in reverse-- a plaintiff could also be charged with perjury if the ruling is such that what they said is ruled false.
Lawyers are completely unaccountable for their actions in court, and many just play it like a game. There is little more serious than court yet circus high-priced lawyers are becoming too common. Perhaps it is merely pop culture that is spreading this image but it is nevertheless wrong and harmful.
That's a little rude. Accurate, but a little rude.
Here's a more correct message:
There are people who by their upbringing (religion, social forces, parents) are predisposed in any of many ways that limits their own abilities significantly. You are not one of them. Anything you do, you will enjoy and will be good at. Note that I did not say great, I said good. Great takes work. So you have a few choices:
Do anything you want, enjoy it, and live off it.
Work very hard suffering mentally at first, and eventually have big payoffs (psychologically and likely financially).
Work very hard suffering mentally the whole way. Rewards come but you push them away because they just interfere with what's important.
Resign yourself to become just a mindless peon.
Most people are dead long before they've died. They might marry, have children, even occasionally read a book but they are acting on external stimuli alone and are, to be blunt, nothing more than walking sacks of chemicals doing everything they should do. They've lost the spark entirely.
I am just as guilty as the next person in causing my own undoing. I do take a little from the fact that I at least acknowledge it, and try to fight it. Who knows, even I may not end up useless after all.
% Meanwhile, Milhouse pets the Springfield VFD's mascot Dalmatian.
% When he asks if the dog can do any tricks, Moe explains that the pooch
% "is so inbred he can barely stand up." The dog falls down on cue.
I don't mind cameras, I mind the people who look through them. If they're responsible, the cameras are responsible. If they aren't, fire and prosecute them, hire new people. There's no difference between a cop patrolling a town and cameras patrolling a town except scale. Data from either one can be stolen or bought. Just because it can be doesn't mean collecting the data is wrong-- it means stealing and bribing for the data is wrong.
The best comparison I can come up with is police having weapons. They are for our protection; however they can be stolen and be used against the police and ourselves. However without them the police are defenseless. I apply the same argument to cameras. They can be stolen and used against us, but without them we are defenseless.
The bottom line is anyone who is determined to kill or rob anyone can do it, probably without getting caught.
Unless someone saw it.
I think dell realizes this. Every time I have sent my laptop in to dell they remind me not to include the harddrive. When you think about it, they really don't have any proper use for it. All that it really does for them is open the doors for lawsuits. "You read this idea I had and used it here.." type stuff.
It would be nice to have a cheap external device that zero'd out an entire harddrive, regardless of any other physical problems with the disk. If those problems include not spinning, perhaps a device could create a strong (contained) emp to simply scramble everything. I'm thinking production model-- either it's something you buy and use yourself, or perhaps stores would have harddrive wipers and charge $5 (random number) for it, depending on price of the machine.
I put a message on a touchy subject in something-- I think it was about macs. I got modded -1 troll. Then I posted the exact same thing, reworded, into the same topic. I think I even mentioned it was just an earlier post reworded. I believe it got +3 interesting. I can't look through my history far enough to find it.
Slashdot Mirror
I just don't trust a free service provider to care too much about my data.
So you prefer the service provider to buy your trust by making you pay them money. Hmm.
Whether or not you directly pay them do not forget you are still their source of income as their advertisers will pay nothing without you. If they piss off an advertiser there are likely hundreds waiting more waiting for an ad spot. However, if they piss of a user, that user will tell more users and much more will be lost. Their business model walks a thin line of supplying what the customer wants (ermanent personal information remaining permanent and personal included).
I prefer
Scientific progress goes BOINC?
WaTu IFu AMeLiKaNSu TuKu A DiFuLeNTu ALuFuABeTu AnDu TuRaIDu RaITiNGu IN Itu.
Err, in retrospect, perhaps not.
Google!
Search: 123.45 meters in inches
Result: 123.45 meters = 4 860.23622 inches
Google!
It's legal terrorism at its finest. The potential for a slap in the face is supposed to keep you from avoiding their totalitarian business model. It's not quite civil disobedience because the law is being broken, however no one is placed in any sort of physical (or even financial) danger (except of course for their shoddy business practices).
My 'terrorism' label could be proven by whether or not they actually take people to court. If not, it's more of a hit-and-run situation.
And let's not forget why we call it stealing. ..
We call it stealing because the original owner no longer has it. No wait...
We call it stealing because.. umm.. they don't get money?
Oh right we call it stealing because the people who made it need money... no wait..
Oh I remember, we call it stealing because some CEO someplace needs to buy a yatched. Yeah, that sounds right.
Disclaimer: This is a joke. Taking this seriously offensively makes you look like an idiot. If you had a girlfriend she'd dump you.
so you want to punish the people who have worked hard their entire lives to earn money...
HAHAHAHhahahahahahahahah!!
Sorry
heh.. heh... AHAHAHahhahahahahahahhahahahaha
This is too much. You're hurting me dude!
OMG!!
you can work hard and make a great life for yourself
I just crapped myself laughing. Send me $20 for a new pair of jeans.
Here are some facts for you. 20 years ago 2/3rds of American companies payed taxes, the rest were exempt after breaks, etc. Today 30% of American companies pay taxes-- mostly small business. 2 of the fortune (I believe it's fortune's list, not sure) top 100 companies pay taxes.
.7 would mean 30 cents saved per 70 cents spend. The propensity to consume is very much inversely proportional to income, mean, the more you make the lower % of it you'll spend. This makes complete sense if you apply a little brain power. If an economy starts to weaken propensity goes down, investing stops from the rich boys, and things plummet.
How much more redistibution of wealth do you want in this country? Should the top 40% pay 95% of the taxes? The top 30%? The top 20%?
For starters the bottom 40% should pay no tax. Do remember that a family with $40,000/year is much poorer than a single person with $40,000/year. Also remember any given dollar amount gets you different things in different states (this is why taxes are complicated) such as apartment prices.
Up from that tax needs to increase accordingly. Anything above normal is luxury so you can do something like take $40,000 (Arbitrary number, not defending it), subtract it from the income, then pay based on a scale that starts at 20% up to 50% as income increases. Again, arbitrary numbers.
The majority of rich people don't hoard their money. That idea is an untrue stereotype. The majority invest it, start new companies, hire more employees, expand their businesses, buy expensive cars, boats, homes, etc. and, in general, keep the economy moving
Actually, yes they do. This is way top-down economics doesn't really work. There is a "propensity to consume". It is basically the measure of how much of a dollar someone would spend if you gave them a dollar. A propensity of
That being said there's one other key: Rich people don't run, help, or even support the economy. They make up the vast minority of purchases. Those that do buy things are usually through businesses with tax exemptions. Tax exemptions pass congress all the time for various industries. This is known as corruption.
Sounds overly dramatic for starters. But what to address?
Is what is between you and a police officer public? That's being implicitly stated in the rather swayed headline. They are implying anything you tell a police officer the officer is free to tell to everyone.
Privacy advocates aren't fighting the battle I want them to be fighting. Police are here to protect me. I'll tell them I'm allergic to penicillin so I won't die when an ambulance comes to save me. I'll tell them who my parents are so they can contact them. I'll tell them every last thing about me if I'm in trouble or someone else is and it can help them.
I also expect that information to be completely confidential. It's still private, just a new person or people has/have been included in my privacy. I would never expect anyone to violate my confidentiality and to do so in any profession usually causes job loss. If a police officer pulls me over and asks for my mother's maiden name right off the bat you're damn straight I'll give it to him. I haven't a clue how much disruption I could possibly cause by not giving it. I might be in a car that matches the description of a criminal and myself as well, yet my ability to simply roll off my mother's maiden name would be enough to convince the officer otherwise.
The price of freedom is eternal vigilance. Vigilance, being an inconvenience at times, but never a rule. My bottom line is don't be an ass. With a bit of cooperation every now and then everyone is safer.
I am an advocate for not having my head shot off by a police officer thinking I have a gun. I am an advocate for being able to walk in a mall knowing that know one around me has a bomb. I am willing to be inconvenienced for this security. What's private, stay's private, in that my life is not affected by anyone new knowing anything. Yes, new people will know more intimate details about me, but those really aren't mine to unless I am willing to give up all of society.
I know exactly what the negative replies to this would be, but go ahead anyway. Someone might learn something just yet.
You gotta see them piss after you put in ethanol instead of methanol.
Oh and spelling errors everywhere, not to mention a terribly belligerent disposition.
I'm not sure what a GMO accident is, but I think a crash with a single fatality could win two darwin awards.
I'm hoping my first flight will include a free meal. I know I'll be hungry after all the shitting and pissing I do during liftoff.
I really do hope the courts do something about this passive signing away of your rights. I call it passive because the agreements define for themselves what agreeing to them means, so they are by nature fraudulent. So buying a product is a legal signature? So is opening a CD case, or installing software? They can put all the "Read the EULA"'s they want, but I don't see how any specific number of warnings suddenly merits compliance by law.
By reading this you acknowledge my right to use your computer to research how better to write future comments. Oh yeah you have to give me your stuff too if you break our agreement. By reading this sentence you have broken our agreement. The next bag of potato chips you open signifies your compliance to turn over all properties that can be used to drink out of.
Seeing all the things Shatner is in right now I'd bet he'd be willing to do it himself for minimum wage... That still doesn't solve your basic complaint though.
Just say 20 years from now I am on my quantum fandangle computer that does sub-atomic calculations, what happens when background radiation hits the processor and flips a few 1s and 0s?
This happens now, actually. We can't stop it entirely, but we can lower the chance that it happens in our modern chips. The funny thing about this problem is that it's usually not a problem. Take a Pentium 4 and flip some bit somewhere in it. Worst case is it'll cause the system to halt (parity checks prevent most bad data from leaving the chip). However just as easily it may take literally years of running the chip without reset for you to ever see the error that was caused, or never. I don't know about you but I don't particularly care if my 286 compatibility goes awry. Even under a fully utilized chip (performing common instructions non-stop) the majority of the chip is usually not be being used. Basically not only does a bit have to be hit, it has to flip. It also has to be at the correct part of the clock cycle such that its value will be read and make it to the next flop. That area of the chip must also be being used. Internal protocols used may even be prepared for mismatches such as this, causing things just to be redone.
Intel and another corporation (Motorola?) recently announced a cutback in lead in their designs so I don't know if they'll put a big chunk of it on for quantum computers. Perhaps they won't have a choice.
Saddam Hussein is going to do a few lectures about genocide (against) in exchange he'll get two years probation.
When traveling west on I90 (NY state thruway) towards Rochester I saw a giant white blimp that looked a lot like this. It was south of the interstate and seemed to be moving with a nice amount of speed. I think they were playing with it because the nose kept dipping then going back up. This was on June 4th. I don't remember but I think it was before Syracuse. Did anyone in the area see this? Was it just a regular blimp? I remember it looking like these photos.
I have to blame our justice system for this one, not that I can think of anything better. When you have two sides arguing in a court room not even being allowed to represent themselves lest be labeled stupid, the case turns into a drama production by lawyers and witnesses who care less for truth and more for victory and money.
If my view if someone is found guilty, any lawyer representing them must answer to perjury charges depending on the circumstances (as well as the defendant). This is also quite plausible in reverse-- a plaintiff could also be charged with perjury if the ruling is such that what they said is ruled false.
Lawyers are completely unaccountable for their actions in court, and many just play it like a game. There is little more serious than court yet circus high-priced lawyers are becoming too common. Perhaps it is merely pop culture that is spreading this image but it is nevertheless wrong and harmful.
That's a little rude. Accurate, but a little rude.
Here's a more correct message:
There are people who by their upbringing (religion, social forces, parents) are predisposed in any of many ways that limits their own abilities significantly. You are not one of them. Anything you do, you will enjoy and will be good at. Note that I did not say great, I said good. Great takes work. So you have a few choices:
Do anything you want, enjoy it, and live off it.
Work very hard suffering mentally at first, and eventually have big payoffs (psychologically and likely financially).
Work very hard suffering mentally the whole way. Rewards come but you push them away because they just interfere with what's important.
Resign yourself to become just a mindless peon.
Most people are dead long before they've died. They might marry, have children, even occasionally read a book but they are acting on external stimuli alone and are, to be blunt, nothing more than walking sacks of chemicals doing everything they should do. They've lost the spark entirely.
I am just as guilty as the next person in causing my own undoing. I do take a little from the fact that I at least acknowledge it, and try to fight it. Who knows, even I may not end up useless after all.
SNPP
Episode: Brother's Little Helper
% Meanwhile, Milhouse pets the Springfield VFD's mascot Dalmatian.
% When he asks if the dog can do any tricks, Moe explains that the pooch
% "is so inbred he can barely stand up." The dog falls down on cue.
I don't mind cameras, I mind the people who look through them. If they're responsible, the cameras are responsible. If they aren't, fire and prosecute them, hire new people. There's no difference between a cop patrolling a town and cameras patrolling a town except scale. Data from either one can be stolen or bought. Just because it can be doesn't mean collecting the data is wrong-- it means stealing and bribing for the data is wrong.
The best comparison I can come up with is police having weapons. They are for our protection; however they can be stolen and be used against the police and ourselves. However without them the police are defenseless. I apply the same argument to cameras. They can be stolen and used against us, but without them we are defenseless.
The bottom line is anyone who is determined to kill or rob anyone can do it, probably without getting caught.
Unless someone saw it.
State governments actually HAVE been outsourcing .
googl'd: http://msnbc.msn.com/id/4450796/
Perhaps federal's safer?
I suggested "Spankeron". Somehow I thought it'd win with the porn industry.
I think dell realizes this. Every time I have sent my laptop in to dell they remind me not to include the harddrive. When you think about it, they really don't have any proper use for it. All that it really does for them is open the doors for lawsuits. "You read this idea I had and used it here.." type stuff.
It would be nice to have a cheap external device that zero'd out an entire harddrive, regardless of any other physical problems with the disk. If those problems include not spinning, perhaps a device could create a strong (contained) emp to simply scramble everything. I'm thinking production model-- either it's something you buy and use yourself, or perhaps stores would have harddrive wipers and charge $5 (random number) for it, depending on price of the machine.
I put a message on a touchy subject in something-- I think it was about macs. I got modded -1 troll. Then I posted the exact same thing, reworded, into the same topic. I think I even mentioned it was just an earlier post reworded. I believe it got +3 interesting. I can't look through my history far enough to find it.