If this was an "absolutely proper equivalence", your car insurance company would gladly pay for your stolen car which you left in a bad neighborhood with the keys in the ignition. However, they do not. Are they "blaming the victim" too? No, just like in the case above, when a party shirks the responsibilities that are expected of them (lock the car, keep the keys, secure their service), they are partly liable.
According to one of the narratives, your calling the media names, blaming the messengers for the bad news and complaining about "fake sources" is quite similar to the way a Trumpy would do it.
Be that as it may, we know from different sources that a bunch of staff has left Tesla, and that since the likes of Apple hire them they are pretty good. These independent observations corroborate the nypost story.
If you have facts that negate it, please post them instead of throwing insults and FUD, it would be a more interesting read.
About as old as the news that practically all "research" that touts "benefits" from alcohol consumption in whatever forms has been sponsored by the alcoholic beverage industry.
But alcohol is an opium for the masses, it is very addictive, and selling addictive stuff that calms you down is good business, both for those who produce it and for those who have to keep the political peace.
Small wonder vodka's price in Russia always goes down when the elite gets themselves in political hot water;)
Investigating and prosecuting for hacking-schmacking is okay, but it isn't a remedy, it is an act of revenge. Unless the companies, which were careless enough to develop and deploy a defective product or don't have adequate training and operational policies to effectively mitigate phishing attacks are held responsible, the incentives are tilted the wrong way.
Imagine what cars would have looked like if car companies were not responsible for the damage a defect in the car cost.
Yet in 2018 my bank's online services contract still claims all losses due to "hacking" are mine only, even if the bank system was at fault.
at least one US-lead disinformation campaign, this is censorship on behalf of the US government, and nothing else.
Remember Iraq having nukular weapons, ready to strike in under 4 hours? Remember "Alkaida operating out of Baghdad"? Remember "Syria chemical weapons facilities bombed", when the said facilities were inspected by OPCW months early and declared clean? Remember Hans Blix?
All these lies were used as excuses for massive wars, which brought an enormous amount of suffering. In combination, the propaganda and the wars are a crime against humanity.
The Xiaomi flaships are phones that are roughly on par with the best "brand" phones out there, at less than half the price - you can get one for less than 350 euros. Xiaomi mid-tier (Note) will have some cheaper components, but still be great phones at a price of less than 200 euros. I don't know about the cheap models. Software support is great, boot is unlockable (the recent 360 hours delay being annoying, but still...) they distribute rootable roms themselves, and there is a bunch of 3rd party roms, too.
Still one of the best brands to buy if you're after a hackable smartphone, imho, unless they continue to fuck with unlocking.
if copyright were for limited times and civilly enforced, then those problems would be addressed, no?
Some of them.
Granting a monopoly is a dangerous pseudo-solution. Why? Because monopoly grants excess economic profits, and these tend to be invested in the political process to extend the monopoly rather than do something else. Why? Well, because extending the monopoly extends the amount of profits.
So, even if you get to curb the "intellectual property" thing to some saner limits, in a few year or decades the situation will be back to today or worse. Something different is needed, and it isn't immediately obvious what this is. But yeah, squeezing back the current situation will be better than nothing.
In a world with sane copyright policy, nobody needs to pirate until there's DRM.
DRM is a distant secondary issue, the primary issue is, as I said above, what is the best way to compensate creativity. Once a compensation scheme that destroys asymmetry of information is established, then I agree, the need for DRM will vanish, because it will be more expensive and unnecessary.
A lawyer paying off a whore with money of his client to keep her mouth shut is one thing. It may be legal, it may be not, I don't know.
However, the same lawyer paying off a whore with his own money on behalf of a client to keep her mouth shut during an election campaign is, apparently, another. Unfortunately, the second is, it seems, defined by the law as illegal, and the lawyer will face scrutiny because of this, whether you call it an overreach or not.
But you know what's the saddest thing here? That the said lawyer learned about this the hard way and admitted guilt. You'd think he'd see it coming, having studied and practiced law, and would be able to defend himself.
If you are a lawyer and can't do your lawyer shit, I have as much sympathy for you as I'd have if you were a sysadmin who left his systems unpatched for years and then came to a spam filter's mailing list to bitch about being blocked.
There are two problems with copyrights and related rights, and both aren't DRM.
The first problem is that the original meaning of the copyright contract - right to monopoly sales (and profits) for a LIMITED TIME in exchange for placing the work in the PUBLIC DOMAIN once the limited time is over - has been destroyed. The LIMITED MONOPOLY is today being called "intellectual property" and the effort to make it perpetual has only increased.
The second problem is that what was essentially a CIVIL matter - the violations of the LIMITED MONOPOLY, has now been turned into a CRIMINAL MATTER.
Thus, the society, which feeds the "IP lawyers" has been shafted twice. Once by giving up its rights on the "copyright" contract, and then by paying for its enforcement.
DRM is just the icing on the cake of misery we suffer at the hands of the "IP lawyers".
I am talking about a scientific framework that will allow you to understand what determines the price of a currency.
If you have a problem wrapping your head about it, I recommend a good book in macroeconomics.
The USD has lost 97% of its purchasing power since 1913
So what?
In contrast, gold has held its purchasing power for literally hundreds if not thousands of years.
So what? You can say gold is a better store of value and present your arguments. But you'll still be using the same framework of analysis.
No, sir. A currency need not hold its value long termâ"if it holds its value, then it is something more than a currency: Money, which need not be a currency.
You, sir, are quite confused and totally misunderstand my point due to substandard education.
Please do yourself a service read a book or two and try to understand why people build models in which different aspects of a phenomenon are looked upon separately.
One is a transaction medium. The other is store of value.
They are very distinct.
A currency, crypto or otherwise is a good transaction medium if, well, it lowers the cost of transactions. It need not be very stable in the long run, as long as it is convenient to use for a payment and be converted to something else at a rate that the holder accepts. Some crypto currencies satisfy the requirements for this category quite well.
But none of the crypto currencies satisfy the most important requirement for being a store of value. For that, you need a currency that has a monetary authority behind it and that authority is both committed and has the resources to maintain the value. For decentralized money instruments like the crypto currencies, this isn't true, and their value will fluctuate a lot depending mostly on demand for transactions and speculation.
So yeah, if you "invest" in a crypto currency be aware that it may jump a lot, especially in the long run. And that you may get burned, just like you will if you "invest" in the currency of a small country that lets it float freely.
Except that the crypto will be a lot more volatile.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, by design, he tries to interact with as large of a portion of the company as possible.
Is that how he met you, the intern that shills for Tesla on slashdot?
Get your shorts in!
I'll cover at $4.20, no worries ;)
+1, wrote almost the same thing above.
/ shaking a tiny fist.
If this was an "absolutely proper equivalence", your car insurance company would gladly pay for your stolen car which you left in a bad neighborhood with the keys in the ignition. However, they do not. Are they "blaming the victim" too? No, just like in the case above, when a party shirks the responsibilities that are expected of them (lock the car, keep the keys, secure their service), they are partly liable.
T-mobile wasn't "dressed provocatively", they just didn't want to pay for security. But congrats on the nice false equivalence.
I would have been gladly entraped by her... 30 years ago.
Or is it "reckless company did not protect the data of millions"?
About time the blame is shared, no?
because they thought Iraq
Because they made it up, you mean.
According to one of the narratives, your calling the media names, blaming the messengers for the bad news and complaining about "fake sources" is quite similar to the way a Trumpy would do it.
Be that as it may, we know from different sources that a bunch of staff has left Tesla, and that since the likes of Apple hire them they are pretty good. These independent observations corroborate the nypost story.
If you have facts that negate it, please post them instead of throwing insults and FUD, it would be a more interesting read.
Apparently, working for Tesla is now officially a shit show: https://nypost.com/2018/08/23/...
There is no "scientific method", this is a red herring.
About as old as the news that practically all "research" that touts "benefits" from alcohol consumption in whatever forms has been sponsored by the alcoholic beverage industry.
But alcohol is an opium for the masses, it is very addictive, and selling addictive stuff that calms you down is good business, both for those who produce it and for those who have to keep the political peace.
Small wonder vodka's price in Russia always goes down when the elite gets themselves in political hot water ;)
Investigating and prosecuting for hacking-schmacking is okay, but it isn't a remedy, it is an act of revenge. Unless the companies, which were careless enough to develop and deploy a defective product or don't have adequate training and operational policies to effectively mitigate phishing attacks are held responsible, the incentives are tilted the wrong way.
Imagine what cars would have looked like if car companies were not responsible for the damage a defect in the car cost.
Yet in 2018 my bank's online services contract still claims all losses due to "hacking" are mine only, even if the bank system was at fault.
It was a minor subplot of "The Count of Monte Cristo", a book written in 1844.
at least one US-lead disinformation campaign, this is censorship on behalf of the US government, and nothing else.
Remember Iraq having nukular weapons, ready to strike in under 4 hours? Remember "Alkaida operating out of Baghdad"? Remember "Syria chemical weapons facilities bombed", when the said facilities were inspected by OPCW months early and declared clean? Remember Hans Blix?
All these lies were used as excuses for massive wars, which brought an enormous amount of suffering. In combination, the propaganda and the wars are a crime against humanity.
But where's the outrage?
I procreate by budding as I'm taking a break, you insensitive clod.
The Xiaomi flaships are phones that are roughly on par with the best "brand" phones out there, at less than half the price - you can get one for less than 350 euros. Xiaomi mid-tier (Note) will have some cheaper components, but still be great phones at a price of less than 200 euros. I don't know about the cheap models. Software support is great, boot is unlockable (the recent 360 hours delay being annoying, but still...) they distribute rootable roms themselves, and there is a bunch of 3rd party roms, too.
Still one of the best brands to buy if you're after a hackable smartphone, imho, unless they continue to fuck with unlocking.
if copyright were for limited times and civilly enforced, then those problems would be addressed, no?
Some of them.
Granting a monopoly is a dangerous pseudo-solution. Why? Because monopoly grants excess economic profits, and these tend to be invested in the political process to extend the monopoly rather than do something else. Why? Well, because extending the monopoly extends the amount of profits.
So, even if you get to curb the "intellectual property" thing to some saner limits, in a few year or decades the situation will be back to today or worse. Something different is needed, and it isn't immediately obvious what this is. But yeah, squeezing back the current situation will be better than nothing.
In a world with sane copyright policy, nobody needs to pirate until there's DRM.
DRM is a distant secondary issue, the primary issue is, as I said above, what is the best way to compensate creativity. Once a compensation scheme that destroys asymmetry of information is established, then I agree, the need for DRM will vanish, because it will be more expensive and unnecessary.
The Communist Party of China is the largest capitalist business on Mother Earth. Has been so since about the midpoint of Deng's rule.
Get up to date on your information, citizen, and bow to the raw power of Capital Unlimited, with no "democracy" to get in the way.
Fine, do it. Just don't sixty-nine them.
A lawyer paying off a whore with money of his client to keep her mouth shut is one thing. It may be legal, it may be not, I don't know.
However, the same lawyer paying off a whore with his own money on behalf of a client to keep her mouth shut during an election campaign is, apparently, another. Unfortunately, the second is, it seems, defined by the law as illegal, and the lawyer will face scrutiny because of this, whether you call it an overreach or not.
But you know what's the saddest thing here? That the said lawyer learned about this the hard way and admitted guilt. You'd think he'd see it coming, having studied and practiced law, and would be able to defend himself.
If you are a lawyer and can't do your lawyer shit, I have as much sympathy for you as I'd have if you were a sysadmin who left his systems unpatched for years and then came to a spam filter's mailing list to bitch about being blocked.
There are two problems with copyrights and related rights, and both aren't DRM.
The first problem is that the original meaning of the copyright contract - right to monopoly sales (and profits) for a LIMITED TIME in exchange for placing the work in the PUBLIC DOMAIN once the limited time is over - has been destroyed. The LIMITED MONOPOLY is today being called "intellectual property" and the effort to make it perpetual has only increased.
The second problem is that what was essentially a CIVIL matter - the violations of the LIMITED MONOPOLY, has now been turned into a CRIMINAL MATTER.
Thus, the society, which feeds the "IP lawyers" has been shafted twice. Once by giving up its rights on the "copyright" contract, and then by paying for its enforcement.
DRM is just the icing on the cake of misery we suffer at the hands of the "IP lawyers".
Store of value. What are you talking about???
I am talking about a scientific framework that will allow you to understand what determines the price of a currency.
If you have a problem wrapping your head about it, I recommend a good book in macroeconomics.
The USD has lost 97% of its purchasing power since 1913
So what?
In contrast, gold has held its purchasing power for literally hundreds if not thousands of years.
So what? You can say gold is a better store of value and present your arguments. But you'll still be using the same framework of analysis.
No, sir. A currency need not hold its value long termâ"if it holds its value, then it is something more than a currency: Money, which need not be a currency.
You, sir, are quite confused and totally misunderstand my point due to substandard education.
Please do yourself a service read a book or two and try to understand why people build models in which different aspects of a phenomenon are looked upon separately.
Good examples all around.
Yet nothing beats the instability of the managerial "mind" hellbent on profit at any cost.
Even nitrogen triiodine.
One is a transaction medium. The other is store of value.
They are very distinct.
A currency, crypto or otherwise is a good transaction medium if, well, it lowers the cost of transactions. It need not be very stable in the long run, as long as it is convenient to use for a payment and be converted to something else at a rate that the holder accepts. Some crypto currencies satisfy the requirements for this category quite well.
But none of the crypto currencies satisfy the most important requirement for being a store of value. For that, you need a currency that has a monetary authority behind it and that authority is both committed and has the resources to maintain the value. For decentralized money instruments like the crypto currencies, this isn't true, and their value will fluctuate a lot depending mostly on demand for transactions and speculation.
So yeah, if you "invest" in a crypto currency be aware that it may jump a lot, especially in the long run. And that you may get burned, just like you will if you "invest" in the currency of a small country that lets it float freely.
Except that the crypto will be a lot more volatile.
Everything is "a fuel", but not everything is "a rocket fuel".
Some things are just disaster fuels, and the race to the bottom called "cost cutting at all costs" is among the most disastrous of the bunch.