Yeah there are a lot of free FPNs out there so $8 a month seems outrageous. Thos people offering the free ones must be losing a lot of money if it really costs $8 a month. I wonder how they can afford it.
When you consider WHY you even want a VPN, then paying for it can seem like a good idea.
But if you actually are trying to protect yourself from various attacks, people scavenging your browsing patterns, targeted ads linked to your IP, hinkey wifi eavesdropping, certain types of man-in-the-middle attacks or people snooping your messages then a trustworthy VPN seems like a good idea
But how do you know which one is trustworthy. You might guess from the price. But an endorsement from firefox, and a well known name like proton is probably the best you can do yourself to find a good one.
If all you are trying to do is violate your employers security firewall blocking you from shopping online during work then a free VPN is a great deal.
they probably could not just give this away even if they wanted too. if they are charging carriers for android and access to the play store then they cant just offer it free to others. chances are many carriers have most favored nation type contracts that says google will always offer it to them at the lowest price it is offered to anyone else.
when you sign a contract like that you dont care what google charges you because you can pass the cost to the consumer when all you competitirs pay the same.
microsoft did thisfor years requiring pc makers to install the OS on every computer if they wanted it on any computer. it wasn't free but it became a cost for the computer that others had to pay too.
don't be evil google just became what it hated-- microsoft.
now they are being forced to debundle it we learn what andriod app suites actually cost the consumer
many many decades ago I was a telephone solicitor. The worst thing you can do for these people is try to keep them on the line. Don't think about hurting the poor slob. If you make sales less lucrative the companies will have to pay these people more per sale. They will earn the same in the end but the employers will be hurt by using a spam model.
I should add that I don't want those features from a third party because I'm not interested in sharing my calling receiving habits with anyone other than my telephone provider. THus I want the phone to handle the intercept and reporting itself not route my calls to nomorobo or someone who is making money off knowing who I take calls from. Yes verizin probably also monetizes me but they also charge me for the phone too so I think they are less inclined to burn me since selling me out egregiously is not their main profit center.
I don't even answer my land line anymore. it's just for calling out. It's always a robocall coming in.
Now my cell phone gets 5 a day. Since I do bussiness on my phone I sort of have to answer numbers I don't know. I loath this invasion because it's so disruptive.
What I want is an answering service that 1. asks the caller to press a specific digit if they are human and know me. 2. A single button on my iphone that reports the caller to the Feds or anyplace that could class-action these mofo.
I don't want to have to cobble that together. I want it built into the android or iphone as a universal feature. If it was universal we stand a chance of making a dent in their bussiness model.
Yeah even my kids think the E-sports term is such a new-speak falsehood. Of course physicist like ot remark that any discpline of science that actually has the word science in the title, isn't really science. (e.g physics and chemistry don't need to be called science, but for some reason "computer science" needs to state it's aspirations in it's name".)
Somehow the term Computer Engineering just wasn't good enough? What's to be embarrassed about engineering?
And likewise Esports is not sports. Sports is not simply playing a game. The game in Sports is just the platform for the competitive aspect whereas in Esports the game is the the whole thing.
Why isn't it good enough to call them "gamers". Why is that an embarrassing term?
Maybe we could call them "athletically challenged"? Or "self-esteem overrated"?
Calling them "Esports" is basically branding them as people you don't want to call by another word because it's politically incorrect.
The problem is in some ways worse than stated since they are front loading the CO2 emissions now rather than later.
However, the same is true of corn ethanol. That too doesn't actually reduce CO2 since about as much petroleum energy goes into raising and drying corn as you get out of it.
The argument for Corn Ethanol is NOT that is it less polluting but that it is the leading edge of a transition to other sources of ethanol that are not yet on the market but consume less petroleum. For example, cellulosic ethanol from switchgrass or poplar.
You need to start transitioning a fleet about 30 years before you want the full transition because that's how long it takes to build the infrastructure, economics benefits to accrue, and to replace the vehicles.
So starting out with Lithium and Ethanol made inefficiently but competitively isn't a terrible idea. And since the numbers of units sold is also low at the start it also isn't a big impact on total CO2.
On the otherhand, Ethanol is probably a lousy idea compared to either Algal fuels or Electric cars. But alagal fuels are not ready for mass production yet.
I'm going to post a story saying slashdot is down, then everyone on slashdot will go visit slashdot and slashdot will be slashdotted. Then after slashdot gets slashdotted someone will submit a story saying slashdot was slashdotted, and then two days later, when this story is posted it will result in yet another slashdotting of slashdot. And so one every two days until the singularity.
Microsoft could stop selling their operating system for non-microsoft computers. Just like google and apple do.
Microsoft computers, like google computers, are not built by microsoft. I suppose one could argue apple doesn't build there's either but they do design and integrate them themselves.
Or they could just go exclusive and only support HP or Lenovo.
just fork it. THen close down the original. The fork gets the new license. Since the original was licesnsed for any purpose, it can be forked since that's a purpose.
Sure no problem. Just change the liscene terms of Wikipedia to no commercial use unless.... then choose something viral like you open source Alexa or the AI using it. Or payment. I'd be opposed to a profit model for Wikipedia but a support model would be reasonable.
GNU GPL is essentiall that. if you use it you open source it. BSD is if you use it you cite it.
First you are right in what you point out. Additionally, what they have been doing is a clinical trial on non-volunteers-- everyone who intersects their roadways. That's really really bad. They should haveracked up a million miles on test tracks before moving to anything with even limited public exposure.
However now that they have done this clinical trial, unethically/illegally or not, they do have a body of evidence that maybe worthy of a phase 2 clinical trial on less constrained public roads.
that is, the sequence of public trials is, determine can a limited trial be done relatively safely, try it in a limited way in labs to show safety, scale up to show effectiveness in labs, if it's effective enough that it's beneficial to the public, then a larger more public trial to look for large scale effectiveness and safety.
But now that they have the data showing it's safe enough to scale, it may be worth letting them do the larger trials
Imagine you go to work at your job, say frying burgers at macdonalds.
Imagine a third party that owns the building rents the use the grill and charges you for ingredients.
Macdonalds pays you to be on-call to supply fried meat. And for 7.95 an hour plus expense you contract to provide as many burgers as you can make in that hour. Your expenses are meat and grill rental are paid to the facility owner.
Are you a contractor or an employee?
By the uber definition, you are supplying the tools of the trade (the fact that you lease them is irrelevant) and macdonalds is purchasing the product you make. They are not employing you. You are a contractor.
If uber is providing the passenger some sort of insurance policy on behalf of the driver then the driver is not a contractor but an employee. Uber is providing the service to the passenger and uber is providing the tools of the trade-- insurance--- for the driver.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah there are a lot of free FPNs out there so $8 a month seems outrageous. Thos people offering the free ones must be losing a lot of money if it really costs $8 a month. I wonder how they can afford it.
When you consider WHY you even want a VPN, then paying for it can seem like a good idea.
But if you actually are trying to protect yourself from various attacks, people scavenging your browsing patterns, targeted ads linked to your IP, hinkey wifi eavesdropping, certain types of man-in-the-middle attacks or people snooping your messages then a trustworthy VPN seems like a good idea
But how do you know which one is trustworthy. You might guess from the price. But an endorsement from firefox, and a well known name like proton is probably the best you can do yourself to find a good one.
If all you are trying to do is violate your employers security firewall blocking you from shopping online during work then a free VPN is a great deal.
How many years were you waiting to unload that braincell?
they probably could not just give this away even if they wanted too. if they are charging carriers for android and access to the play store then they cant just offer it free to others. chances are many carriers have most favored nation type contracts that says google will always offer it to them at the lowest price it is offered to anyone else.
when you sign a contract like that you dont care what google charges you because you can pass the cost to the consumer when all you competitirs pay the same.
microsoft did thisfor years requiring pc makers to install the OS on every computer if they wanted it on any computer. it wasn't free but it became a cost for the computer that others had to pay too.
don't be evil google just became what it hated-- microsoft.
now they are being forced to debundle it we learn what andriod app suites actually cost the consumer
How would you report the caller? The number is spoofed.
You collect 5000 examples of this spoofing, then you sue Verizon for allowing spoofing.
many many decades ago I was a telephone solicitor. The worst thing you can do for these people is try to keep them on the line. Don't think about hurting the poor slob. If you make sales less lucrative the companies will have to pay these people more per sale. They will earn the same in the end but the employers will be hurt by using a spam model.
I should add that I don't want those features from a third party because I'm not interested in sharing my calling receiving habits with anyone other than my telephone provider. THus I want the phone to handle the intercept and reporting itself not route my calls to nomorobo or someone who is making money off knowing who I take calls from. Yes verizin probably also monetizes me but they also charge me for the phone too so I think they are less inclined to burn me since selling me out egregiously is not their main profit center.
I don't even answer my land line anymore. it's just for calling out. It's always a robocall coming in.
Now my cell phone gets 5 a day. Since I do bussiness on my phone I sort of have to answer numbers I don't know. I loath this invasion because it's so disruptive.
What I want is an answering service that
1. asks the caller to press a specific digit if they are human and know me.
2. A single button on my iphone that reports the caller to the Feds or anyplace that could class-action these mofo.
I don't want to have to cobble that together. I want it built into the android or iphone as a universal feature. If it was universal we stand a chance of making a dent in their bussiness model.
with 4D printing the volume extends into another dimension so it doesn't take up much space in your pocket
Yeah even my kids think the E-sports term is such a new-speak falsehood. Of course physicist like ot remark that any discpline of science that actually has the word science in the title, isn't really science. (e.g physics and chemistry don't need to be called science, but for some reason "computer science" needs to state it's aspirations in it's name".)
Somehow the term Computer Engineering just wasn't good enough? What's to be embarrassed about engineering?
And likewise Esports is not sports. Sports is not simply playing a game. The game in Sports is just the platform for the competitive aspect whereas in Esports the game is the the whole thing.
Why isn't it good enough to call them "gamers". Why is that an embarrassing term?
Maybe we could call them "athletically challenged"? Or "self-esteem overrated"?
Calling them "Esports" is basically branding them as people you don't want to call by another word because it's politically incorrect.
The problem is in some ways worse than stated since they are front loading the CO2 emissions now rather than later.
However, the same is true of corn ethanol. That too doesn't actually reduce CO2 since about as much petroleum energy goes into raising and drying corn as you get out of it.
The argument for Corn Ethanol is NOT that is it less polluting but that it is the leading edge of a transition to other sources of ethanol that are not yet on the market but consume less petroleum. For example, cellulosic ethanol from switchgrass or poplar.
You need to start transitioning a fleet about 30 years before you want the full transition because that's how long it takes to build the infrastructure, economics benefits to accrue, and to replace the vehicles.
So starting out with Lithium and Ethanol made inefficiently but competitively isn't a terrible idea. And since the numbers of units sold is also low at the start it also isn't a big impact on total CO2.
On the otherhand, Ethanol is probably a lousy idea compared to either Algal fuels or Electric cars. But alagal fuels are not ready for mass production yet.
I'm going to post a story saying slashdot is down, then everyone on slashdot will go visit slashdot and slashdot will be slashdotted. Then after slashdot gets slashdotted someone will submit a story saying slashdot was slashdotted, and then two days later, when this story is posted it will result in yet another slashdotting of slashdot. And so one every two days until the singularity.
it means it's webScale.
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=mongodb+i...
the links rot.
iphone 6. it wasn't popular so they made the next ones non-folding.
Apples computer sales increased by 18% last year. That means just their increase alone exceeded all of the microsoft sales. Why isn't that news?
Microsoft could stop selling their operating system for non-microsoft computers. Just like google and apple do.
Microsoft computers, like google computers, are not built by microsoft. I suppose one could argue apple doesn't build there's either but they do design and integrate them themselves.
Or they could just go exclusive and only support HP or Lenovo.
THat would definitely drive the upgrade cycle.
Apple already made a bendable phone.
People complained when apple shipped a bendable phone.
They are about to ship a special Duke Nukem Anniversary edition next year.
just fork it. THen close down the original. The fork gets the new license. Since the original was licesnsed for any purpose, it can be forked since that's a purpose.
the terrorists screw up the system by fixing things so they work better.
Sure no problem. Just change the liscene terms of Wikipedia to no commercial use unless .... then choose something viral like you open source Alexa or the AI using it. Or payment. I'd be opposed to a profit model for Wikipedia but a support model would be reasonable.
GNU GPL is essentiall that. if you use it you open source it. BSD is if you use it you cite it.
First you are right in what you point out. Additionally, what they have been doing is a clinical trial on non-volunteers-- everyone who intersects their roadways. That's really really bad. They should haveracked up a million miles on test tracks before moving to anything with even limited public exposure.
However now that they have done this clinical trial, unethically/illegally or not, they do have a body of evidence that maybe worthy of a phase 2 clinical trial on less constrained public roads.
that is, the sequence of public trials is, determine can a limited trial be done relatively safely, try it in a limited way in labs to show safety, scale up to show effectiveness in labs, if it's effective enough that it's beneficial to the public, then a larger more public trial to look for large scale effectiveness and safety.
But now that they have the data showing it's safe enough to scale, it may be worth letting them do the larger trials
Imagine you go to work at your job, say frying burgers at macdonalds.
Imagine a third party that owns the building rents the use the grill and charges you for ingredients.
Macdonalds pays you to be on-call to supply fried meat. And for 7.95 an hour plus expense you contract to provide as many burgers as you can make in that hour. Your expenses are meat and grill rental are paid to the facility owner.
Are you a contractor or an employee?
By the uber definition, you are supplying the tools of the trade (the fact that you lease them is irrelevant) and macdonalds is purchasing the product you make. They are not employing you. You are a contractor.
If uber is providing the passenger some sort of insurance policy on behalf of the driver then the driver is not a contractor but an employee. Uber is providing the service to the passenger and uber is providing the tools of the trade-- insurance--- for the driver.