Paypal is overextending themselves here. Charities could give them one account that is usually empty, and move funds from it to another account so that even if Paypal could remove funds they wouldn't be able to do so. Therefore Paypal has no recourse here and this is further evidence that they are attempting to be corrupt. They have no right to stipulate how some company does business.
I think this is a good decision because you can still charge for setup fees, but just not royalties, which are recurring payments that only line the pockets of the company that started the ball rolling. Microsoft would counter this by charging for updates and ensuring early software is broken enough that people will pay for updates. Fucking bastards.
The spin from Google on this seems legit, but it also seems like they just want to have access to all our shit in case they want to snoop. I mean how hard would it be for them to read all the documents or pass on our footprints to other parties?
Manning is a hero to democracy. He risked everything to ensure that the people found out the truth about all the dirty secrets. I personally believe that in order for our world to get past all the bickering and warring, we will need open government as a constraint. We will not be able to properly explore deep space and survive our eventual destruction without complete openness in all aspects of our lives as well. Until then, we will be playing shadow games with one another and we will remain stuck on this rock, doomed.
Also, PayPal is not a good organization. They are self-interested, and corrupt.
Not likely. The setting this is advertised for is the medical environment, where users are well aware that they are handling sensitive data. If logging back on is as easy as they make it seem in the video, it may even be a benefit to the users.
You could be right. Instead of putting duct tape this level of subterfuge may require cloudy scotch tape to be equally as effective. It's possible that some people would use this as intended with the cards, but my guess is that those cards could easily be duped, making this a very insecure system.
Because management won't spring for the sonar badges that log you in automatically or the badges will turn out to be flawed and insecure as hell, so they will be disabled. And employees won't want to be micromanaged, so they will slap tape over the sonar which will then react as though someone is within range of the keyboard.
This is going to be nightmarish for IT and it will generate all kinds of useless calls as a result. My guess is we'll be seeing some people using duct tape over the sensors on the first day too, making these expensive keyboards totally useless, apart from being a great way to inflate IT budgets, to ensure they stay plump.
Google caters to the dregs of internet marketing. I'm not speaking about the good companies out there who just want to promote their services. I'm talking about the SEO types who spam and break any of the rules they want, to turn quick bucks on poor schmucks. Google pretends they aren't in league with these guys but Google profits from that money as probably the largest chunk of cash they generate from search. There are many stories of Google freezing adwords/adsense assets of reputable and degenerate folks alike -- refusing to pay out, and playing all kinds of games when it comes to money that would otherwise deplete Google's bottom line. Google does not reimburse these funds so it's free money for them or perhaps they charge some of it off as service charges.
At any rate, Google is not the paragon of value it once was. It's too big to have a clear vision. It's clear Google has abandoned it's motto of doing no evil, because that's kinda impractical to their opportunity, and therefore the organization is in decline from its original greatness. Many evil companies turn very high profit today, so we may continue to see profits from Google -- but we cannot expect to see them in the forefront should a paragon company surface and gain momentum. Google is relegated to the moral equivalent of Yahoo.
The fundamentals speak to the rise or fall of an organization so I foresee an eventual decline in Google if we can get a Mark Zuckerberg to launch something disruptive in the search market. P2P decentralized search is probably the best idea going as of right now and it wouldn't be controlled by one organization, only a group of open source developers. That would be paragon enough.
The former employer complained about me leaving suddenly at a social event, to a number of people I know, while they were rubbing elbows. Some of the folks who were present mentioned it to me. Later on the same people phoned me and told me about that same customer stiffing my former employer.
You can't. They are everywhere. However, you can escape them if you become an entrepreneur and write your own shit, then anyone you hire has to be up to standards or you fire them. This is how good companies replace bad ones.
Years ago I quit my job web developing because a customer of my former employer was shady, and promising that the websites could do credit card sales, built in... at no additional charge. So when I quit my job over this kind of blatant lying, I was blacklisted by the former employer. A couple months later, their prized customer stiffed them in $15k worth of fees.
I phoned my former employer when I heard the news and gave her a bit of the "I told you so," except I was kind about it, and polite. It was apparent from her responses she felt sorry for blacklisting me, and sorry for not listening.
Sometimes the flak is warranted. Management: listen to your people or don't fucking hire them to begin with.
Domain names are addresses. I think in general it's time we stop thinking about our vanity and start thinking about the fucking CONTENT located on each website, from a kind of internet quality perspective. While it isn't any government's business what I call my website, I don't know if it matters that much what my domain name is, so I don't care if it had to be changed for some viable reason.
glennbeckrapedandmurderedayounggirlin1990.com/ (now a dead link) comes to mind here as being one of those domains I wouldn't want to see sabotaged by a government, just because it's a possibly slanderous domain name. It's an address and it's a freedom of speech issue that someone can put anything they want as a domain. I think this is why we need a free internet.
But here's the other rub. If some governments are going to start imposing restrictions on domains, I can see a totally viable internet business as being a forwarding one, where you put your server IP in and alias it to whatever the fuck you want, which actually wouldn't be that fucking hard right now. Then people of a particular mindset could use the forwarding service to bypass any form of government restriction and we can all say fuck you to big government, but unlike the Tea Party -- we could really mean it.
He neither bought, nor were they for sale, my beliefs, my ideals, my interests
I absolutely agree with you here. However, when you are employed with a company you are expected to be loyal as part of the obligation. Employees that trash their company's products or blatantly use the competitor's products are not going to be long-term career assets to the company -- they will be used and tossed aside.
If a company does not understand the difference between what's for sale on a work contract and what's not, it's time to go to a company that does.
I think what this speaks to is corporate cultures. I think that every person should try and find an organization that adheres to their own personal values, but more importantly is able to entice us with perks when we perform, and help us to grow as individuals with new challenges and even overwhelming duties that help us to maximize our potential as human beings. Many people are not doing this in life, and they are accepting second rate employers as being adequate for the time being, as a kind of lazy excuse not to find a better career.
Employers that treat their people right, get to keep their people. Those that don't end up having silent strikes happening in each worker, or wind up losing alarming amounts of money from employee apathy.
This is more evidence that MPAA are thugs and they want to destroy the internet. Just because you want to destroy the internet, doesn't mean you can actually do it, or at least not without the help of a Republican president.
TBH, I think employers in the States are a little presumptuous over the lives of those who work for them.
Meddling with your employees only turns them against you. Stop it.
If you are worried about what people will say about you over social networking sites, then it's time to have better policies that make sense to everyone, and consider your employees first, but this doesn't cover disloyalty, so if you work for Pepsi or Coke and you drink the other company's products on your social media you could still be fired.
Slashdot Mirror
Paypal is overextending themselves here. Charities could give them one account that is usually empty, and move funds from it to another account so that even if Paypal could remove funds they wouldn't be able to do so. Therefore Paypal has no recourse here and this is further evidence that they are attempting to be corrupt. They have no right to stipulate how some company does business.
Further evidence of them being shady is that after I have spoken against them, one of their developers ceased his Slashdot relationship with me.
I think this is a good decision because you can still charge for setup fees, but just not royalties, which are recurring payments that only line the pockets of the company that started the ball rolling. Microsoft would counter this by charging for updates and ensuring early software is broken enough that people will pay for updates. Fucking bastards.
I mean this is awful.
The spin from Google on this seems legit, but it also seems like they just want to have access to all our shit in case they want to snoop. I mean how hard would it be for them to read all the documents or pass on our footprints to other parties?
Manning is a hero to democracy. He risked everything to ensure that the people found out the truth about all the dirty secrets. I personally believe that in order for our world to get past all the bickering and warring, we will need open government as a constraint. We will not be able to properly explore deep space and survive our eventual destruction without complete openness in all aspects of our lives as well. Until then, we will be playing shadow games with one another and we will remain stuck on this rock, doomed.
Also, PayPal is not a good organization. They are self-interested, and corrupt.
Just saw this scumbag mashup a few minutes ago on Reddit and I had to chuckle.
Except to kids.
You could be right. Instead of putting duct tape this level of subterfuge may require cloudy scotch tape to be equally as effective. It's possible that some people would use this as intended with the cards, but my guess is that those cards could easily be duped, making this a very insecure system.
Because management won't spring for the sonar badges that log you in automatically or the badges will turn out to be flawed and insecure as hell, so they will be disabled. And employees won't want to be micromanaged, so they will slap tape over the sonar which will then react as though someone is within range of the keyboard.
Will fix the problem of these keyboards logging you out when you leave for a quick coffee. Once again, any kind of security is thwarted by duct tape.
This is going to be nightmarish for IT and it will generate all kinds of useless calls as a result. My guess is we'll be seeing some people using duct tape over the sensors on the first day too, making these expensive keyboards totally useless, apart from being a great way to inflate IT budgets, to ensure they stay plump.
Google caters to the dregs of internet marketing. I'm not speaking about the good companies out there who just want to promote their services. I'm talking about the SEO types who spam and break any of the rules they want, to turn quick bucks on poor schmucks. Google pretends they aren't in league with these guys but Google profits from that money as probably the largest chunk of cash they generate from search. There are many stories of Google freezing adwords/adsense assets of reputable and degenerate folks alike -- refusing to pay out, and playing all kinds of games when it comes to money that would otherwise deplete Google's bottom line. Google does not reimburse these funds so it's free money for them or perhaps they charge some of it off as service charges.
At any rate, Google is not the paragon of value it once was. It's too big to have a clear vision. It's clear Google has abandoned it's motto of doing no evil, because that's kinda impractical to their opportunity, and therefore the organization is in decline from its original greatness. Many evil companies turn very high profit today, so we may continue to see profits from Google -- but we cannot expect to see them in the forefront should a paragon company surface and gain momentum. Google is relegated to the moral equivalent of Yahoo.
The fundamentals speak to the rise or fall of an organization so I foresee an eventual decline in Google if we can get a Mark Zuckerberg to launch something disruptive in the search market. P2P decentralized search is probably the best idea going as of right now and it wouldn't be controlled by one organization, only a group of open source developers. That would be paragon enough.
This appears to be a failed pun thread. I suggest we try and save it.
The rate our fractured governments achieve anything, we are totally fucked if this happens in the next thousand years.
"Sir, it says they are in the library but all I see here is an empty bag of Doritos." (trackers crammed into ceiling tiles.)
The former employer complained about me leaving suddenly at a social event, to a number of people I know, while they were rubbing elbows. Some of the folks who were present mentioned it to me. Later on the same people phoned me and told me about that same customer stiffing my former employer.
You can't. They are everywhere. However, you can escape them if you become an entrepreneur and write your own shit, then anyone you hire has to be up to standards or you fire them. This is how good companies replace bad ones.
Years ago I quit my job web developing because a customer of my former employer was shady, and promising that the websites could do credit card sales, built in... at no additional charge. So when I quit my job over this kind of blatant lying, I was blacklisted by the former employer. A couple months later, their prized customer stiffed them in $15k worth of fees.
I phoned my former employer when I heard the news and gave her a bit of the "I told you so," except I was kind about it, and polite. It was apparent from her responses she felt sorry for blacklisting me, and sorry for not listening.
Sometimes the flak is warranted. Management: listen to your people or don't fucking hire them to begin with.
You won't crash the internet by crashing into the internet.
Next year on the Grammy's award Star Trek Next Generation a grammy for this.
Red sleeves.
Domain names are addresses. I think in general it's time we stop thinking about our vanity and start thinking about the fucking CONTENT located on each website, from a kind of internet quality perspective. While it isn't any government's business what I call my website, I don't know if it matters that much what my domain name is, so I don't care if it had to be changed for some viable reason.
glennbeckrapedandmurderedayounggirlin1990.com/ (now a dead link) comes to mind here as being one of those domains I wouldn't want to see sabotaged by a government, just because it's a possibly slanderous domain name. It's an address and it's a freedom of speech issue that someone can put anything they want as a domain. I think this is why we need a free internet.
But here's the other rub. If some governments are going to start imposing restrictions on domains, I can see a totally viable internet business as being a forwarding one, where you put your server IP in and alias it to whatever the fuck you want, which actually wouldn't be that fucking hard right now. Then people of a particular mindset could use the forwarding service to bypass any form of government restriction and we can all say fuck you to big government, but unlike the Tea Party -- we could really mean it.
I absolutely agree with you here. However, when you are employed with a company you are expected to be loyal as part of the obligation. Employees that trash their company's products or blatantly use the competitor's products are not going to be long-term career assets to the company -- they will be used and tossed aside.
I think what this speaks to is corporate cultures. I think that every person should try and find an organization that adheres to their own personal values, but more importantly is able to entice us with perks when we perform, and help us to grow as individuals with new challenges and even overwhelming duties that help us to maximize our potential as human beings. Many people are not doing this in life, and they are accepting second rate employers as being adequate for the time being, as a kind of lazy excuse not to find a better career.
Employers that treat their people right, get to keep their people. Those that don't end up having silent strikes happening in each worker, or wind up losing alarming amounts of money from employee apathy.
You get what you fucking pay for! :)
This is more evidence that MPAA are thugs and they want to destroy the internet. Just because you want to destroy the internet, doesn't mean you can actually do it, or at least not without the help of a Republican president.
No just kidding I fucking love my job.
TBH, I think employers in the States are a little presumptuous over the lives of those who work for them.
Meddling with your employees only turns them against you. Stop it.
If you are worried about what people will say about you over social networking sites, then it's time to have better policies that make sense to everyone, and consider your employees first, but this doesn't cover disloyalty, so if you work for Pepsi or Coke and you drink the other company's products on your social media you could still be fired.