There is still doubt. The announcement is so vague that I am not convinced if they accessed the phone or are just saving face (since they didn't particularly need the contents in the first place).
Only the Food Industry could make fruit unhealthy.
Many, many of the juice drinks are prominently labelled with phrases like "contains 3% juice" or "contains no actual juice". They are just selling crap that has nothing to do with fruit and label it as such. Not "making fruit unhealthy".
absolutely NO ONE EVER stood by a payphone waiting for a call
A absolutely agree with you, but...
When was the last time you saw a payphone on the street? Unless it was an episode of Person of Interest where the plot requires having it.
If there was something $10 less than a 65x65 room, then there to some people the 65x65 room looks like a frivolous luxury expense.... This is why there have always been health and safety regulations. Now with Ubers and Air BnBs able to work around the regulations, there is nothing to stop from hitting the bottom.
Despite the attempt to link this it to Air BnB (clickbait), this is simply a micro-hotel as any other. The shared bathroom may or may not be to your tastes, but ~8x8 (65sq ft) is a potentially reasonable cheap option if you don't plan to do anything but sleep.
I have rented something similar (hourly basis) in London to get some sleep at 4am in the airport and it worked for me.
I agree with your sentiment, but your sentiment is about unregulated Uber and Air BnB. This article is (presumably) about a regulated special-purpose hotel that is completely unrelated to Air BnB type service.
US detention facility which was largely used for COMBATANTS seized in what is effectively a war zone, but whose status was questionable as they chose not to wear uniforms.
Keeping combatants would have been fine if someone bothered to check carefully if they are, in fact, combatants. They have no access to evidence against them or proper access to lawyers. If someone was not a combatant, what do you think they can do to prove it?
"effectively a war zone" I believe covers all of the countries where we had a military operation at one time? I have heard numerous statements that include United States territory as the "war zone" in "war on terror". Considering that the new definition seems to include almost every place, being captured in a war zone no longer has the same ring to it. Your "chose not to wear uniforms" status also heavily relies on assuming that once you are in Guantanamo, you are by definition a combatant. Why would you assume that? Even with very poor access to legal defense, quite a few were deemed innocent and released after years of detention.
combatants seized in such circumstances should have been wrung for information and then summarily executed as they were nothing more than bandits
Oh, good. Summarily executed, huh? You do realize that many were captured based on someone else pointing a finger at them (often for a reward). Wouldn't you want to at least have a trial before execution?
SECOND: "...most brutal and least reported abuse...that any human has seen in the 21st century"
Not even close to true.
You must have missed ISIS, then? Or did I miss the mass executions at Guantanamo? The videotaped beheadings?
You are focusing on most brutal and you have a point. However, they might still have a valid point regarding the least reported abuse. A lot of them tried to go on hanger strike and were force-fed. To me, that indicates much has gone unreported.
NONE of the what, 9 deaths at Guantanamo have been caused by the US government. 7 were suicides
What kind of asinine logic is that. They are locked up for years without trial, but their suicides were not caused by US government? They were just depressed people, with a pre-existing condition?
1 was cancer (and those last to I almost guarantee got BETTER health care and end-of-life care than they'd have gotten in whatever pestilential 3rd world country they came from).
So as long as they got better health care, it is ok to lock them up? Not very relevant.
as prisons go, the Cuban ones outside Guantanamo's walls have been FAR worse for 50 years. Curious that you haven't complained about that?
They are not maintained by United States, which makes them somewhat different from the prisons that are.
They can leave BUT THEIR HOMES DON'T WANT THEM, NEITHER DOES ANY OTHER COUNTRY - even countries inimical to the US like Venezuela or North Korea. Why do you suppose that is? These are troublemaking, BAD people.
So is that an excuse? It's ok to keep them there as long as no one likes them?
Perhaps they should have been tried somehow. With an actual trial outcome proving their innocence (or at least not-proving guilt), perhaps some countries would take them.
Have you considered the possibility that their homes don't want them because they were held, for years, without trial in the scary worst-of-the-worst "terrorist prison"?
Are they now? And you know this how? If there ever was a case of [citation required]...
I think for most of them, no one even knows why they are being held. I mean, check out this list. If entries such as "Determined to be innocent. Still detained" or "Ruled innocent. Claims beating crippled him" do not scare you, I don't know what will.
Considering that they are not guaranteed access to evidence against them or proper access to lawyers, the fact that some were still ruled innocent, implies that majority of them are likely innocent.
Not to mention that after someone had been detained for 5-10-15 years without trial in terrible conditions, may just become a terrorist in response to such treatment.
Being able to push OTA updates will only encourage managers to declare projects done then fix things later.
Oh, yes. I can see it now.
Pay only $2.99 per month, to customize your ABS brake response... or to overclock the car's CPU processor... or to prevent it from reporting your movements to nearby police cars.
Under Obama the rules of engagement changed dramatically, the rules now require that there be no known civilian casualties.
You do know that this is achieved by decreeing that all males of military age are automatically considered militants? So the rules achieved "no known civilian casualties" by assuming that if you are killed then you were a militant. (Citation)
The number of civilians killed in strikes has dramatically decreased.
Citation needed -- including who counts as "civilian" in this decrease.
Obama deserves credit for halting the indiscriminate killings with bombs and missiles
Obama has appointed himself as a Judge/Jury/Executioner, and redefined words (such as "imminent threat" or "indiscriminate killings") rather than halted anything. Citation
she actually saw the words 'user refuses to pay' in one of them.
Was there also evidence of why the Illuminati caused 9/11 and keept cold fusion under wraps?
Mysterious corruption is certainly possible, but there is zero reason for them to explicitly admit that they are doing something bad on client side.
jack up taxes any more and you'll see even more assets leave for tax havens.
What makes you think that all assets (that could) did not already leave? Do you think people are keeping their assets here and paying taxes just because they are team players?
There are a few new snippets of information, sure, but there's hardly full transparency;... We are instead treated to a short blog post littered with links to other pages on the Adblock Plus site, forums pages, and so on.
TFA (as per quote above) is a vague blog post that attempts to describe another vague blog post. Most of TFA is spent admitting that there is very little content to talk about.
but I can see from the other comments you've been shot down pretty well.
Indeed, I have.
Wireless works in Linux.
I believe you when you say it worked for you, but that does not generalize. We are in a rare scenario where anecdotal data actually applies. Assuming you believe me, of course. Wireless did not work for me ~2 years ago in Debian. Honest. I spent quite a few hours googling things over a couple of days and trying what things Internet recommended, after which I moved on to another flavor of Linux (which had other issues).
There are more than a few webpages online dedicated specifically to helping choose the right chipset/WiFi card properly supported by Linux. See Debian's Wiki on the topic. "Currently there are only a few modern wifi chipsets readily available that work with free software systems." Do you honestly think that to be equivalent to "Wireless works in Linux"?
I've done 8 or 9 installs of Mint in the last month on a variety of hardware (laptops and desktops) and the wireless functions have worked without a hitch every single time. In fact everything has worked every single time,
I have pretty specifically said that I do not have any direct experience with Linux Mint -- you could at least finish reading my entire post before "calling bullshit" (unless you think I am making everything up?). Personally, I have dealt with Debian, CentOS (mostly) and Ubuntu at various times. Trying to get wireless to work was a Debian problem. Message boards seemed to suggest kernel recompilation -- I am not even saying it had to be done, I am saying that's what Google research showed at the time.
Not knowing which flavor of Linux to install is actually the first problem I have encountered when setting up a new machine with Linux. If everyone here swears by it, Linux Mint may be the one I used next time.
Bullshit for very large values of bullshit. I haven't had wireless not work: on any installs I've done in the last 8-10 years now.
I think this is one rare example where anecdotal data counts. I am not saying it never works. It clearly worked for you. Perhaps you did your research in choosing the WiFi card first (I did not).
First Google page hit on debian wireless not working supports my claim. I am not saying it is Linux's fault, but there appears to be consensus on wiki.debian.org that "Wifi has always been a problem for free software users. USB Wifi cards are becoming less free."
if access to the data on the phone could potentially save lives
That's not really an argument, but more of a random statement.
Keeping everyone sedated and locked up in a room when they are not at work could also potentially save a lot of lives (by keeping some perpetrators and many potential victims off the streets). But we are not planning to do that either.
I'm sure if it came with Linux Mint preinstalled an awful lot of people wouldn't even notice, because Gmail would work fine.
Not until they want wireless to work -- and are then told on all discussion forums that they have to recompile the kernel for that. I am sure they will notice the difference then
I know it will cost me some karma (and that everyone's grandma uses Linux now). I also do not know Linux Mint, but I run into things like this all the time with other flavors. "For X to work, need to install these 15 libraries, some of which have to be compiled from source or installed from custom repositories that have to be identified and configured first" (CentOS).
"Wireless USB card will not work unless you follow these instructions to recompile the kernel" (Debian, a couple of years ago).
Ok, now you can downmod me and pretend that what I say isn't true. But these are my actual experiences.
I think besides the usual (security issues, browser crashing, screen space, auto-play, sound, popups, etc, etc), this one does not get enough outrage.
3. For those systems where advertisers bid the suppliers for who gets displayed, the end user can sit doing nothing while the site owners wait for some "optimum" bid.
The webpage is literally sitting there hanging because some random ad website is not responding now. If that doesn't show how little companies care about users, I don't know what does. I remember a period when Blockbuster.com page used to stop dead for 5-10 seconds trying to contact some Facebook sub-domain, and it drove me crazy every time.
Just shows how ignorant most of our American population is with technology.
This debate doesn't have so much to do with technology, though. Concept is simple enough [insert car--encryption analogy]
It's like all those senators doing bad things under the guise of "they are old people who just don't understand technology". They may not know the low-level technical details, but they certainly understand the relevant concepts in the crafted law, they just don't care about our opinion.
From a user's perspective, isn't the sidebar an ideal place for ads so they don't mix in with search results?
No, research shows that users would prefer to see ads mixed in with links (link - ad - link - ad). It is even better if links jump around under your mouse or at least regularly obscured with a surprise overlay banner "subscribe here!".
Users only liked unobtrusive ads in the 90s -- tastes have clearly changed.
Slashdot Mirror
...was there ever any doubt?
There is still doubt.
The announcement is so vague that I am not convinced if they accessed the phone or are just saving face (since they didn't particularly need the contents in the first place).
Only the Food Industry could make fruit unhealthy.
Many, many of the juice drinks are prominently labelled with phrases like "contains 3% juice" or "contains no actual juice".
They are just selling crap that has nothing to do with fruit and label it as such. Not "making fruit unhealthy".
absolutely NO ONE EVER stood by a payphone waiting for a call
A absolutely agree with you, but...
When was the last time you saw a payphone on the street?
Unless it was an episode of Person of Interest where the plot requires having it.
The lesson here is do not defraud the rich.
I think the lesson here is "do not draw attention to the man behind the curtain". Whether or not he made any money is unimportant.
The electronic/automated trading system is an accident waiting to happen and he made it clear to the general public.
convenience of frictionless electronic transacting
You mean like 2.8% of the amount collected by the processor every time you do anything with money "frictionless" transacting?
If there was something $10 less than a 65x65 room, then there to some people the 65x65 room looks like a frivolous luxury expense. ... This is why there have always been health and safety regulations. Now with Ubers and Air BnBs able to work around the regulations, there is nothing to stop from hitting the bottom.
Despite the attempt to link this it to Air BnB (clickbait), this is simply a micro-hotel as any other. The shared bathroom may or may not be to your tastes, but ~8x8 (65sq ft) is a potentially reasonable cheap option if you don't plan to do anything but sleep.
I have rented something similar (hourly basis) in London to get some sleep at 4am in the airport and it worked for me.
I agree with your sentiment, but your sentiment is about unregulated Uber and Air BnB. This article is (presumably) about a regulated special-purpose hotel that is completely unrelated to Air BnB type service.
Also you don't forcefeed anyone rectally. Digestion literally doesn't work that way.
South Park begs to differ!
US detention facility which was largely used for COMBATANTS seized in what is effectively a war zone, but whose status was questionable as they chose not to wear uniforms.
Keeping combatants would have been fine if someone bothered to check carefully if they are, in fact, combatants. They have no access to evidence against them or proper access to lawyers. If someone was not a combatant, what do you think they can do to prove it?
"effectively a war zone" I believe covers all of the countries where we had a military operation at one time? I have heard numerous statements that include United States territory as the "war zone" in "war on terror". Considering that the new definition seems to include almost every place, being captured in a war zone no longer has the same ring to it. Your "chose not to wear uniforms" status also heavily relies on assuming that once you are in Guantanamo, you are by definition a combatant. Why would you assume that? Even with very poor access to legal defense, quite a few were deemed innocent and released after years of detention.
combatants seized in such circumstances should have been wrung for information and then summarily executed as they were nothing more than bandits
Oh, good. Summarily executed, huh? You do realize that many were captured based on someone else pointing a finger at them (often for a reward). Wouldn't you want to at least have a trial before execution?
SECOND: "...most brutal and least reported abuse ...that any human has seen in the 21st century"
Not even close to true. You must have missed ISIS, then? Or did I miss the mass executions at Guantanamo? The videotaped beheadings?
You are focusing on most brutal and you have a point. However, they might still have a valid point regarding the least reported abuse. A lot of them tried to go on hanger strike and were force-fed. To me, that indicates much has gone unreported.
NONE of the what, 9 deaths at Guantanamo have been caused by the US government. 7 were suicides
What kind of asinine logic is that. They are locked up for years without trial, but their suicides were not caused by US government? They were just depressed people, with a pre-existing condition?
1 was cancer (and those last to I almost guarantee got BETTER health care and end-of-life care than they'd have gotten in whatever pestilential 3rd world country they came from).
So as long as they got better health care, it is ok to lock them up? Not very relevant.
as prisons go, the Cuban ones outside Guantanamo's walls have been FAR worse for 50 years. Curious that you haven't complained about that?
They are not maintained by United States, which makes them somewhat different from the prisons that are.
They can leave BUT THEIR HOMES DON'T WANT THEM, NEITHER DOES ANY OTHER COUNTRY - even countries inimical to the US like Venezuela or North Korea. Why do you suppose that is? These are troublemaking, BAD people.
So is that an excuse? It's ok to keep them there as long as no one likes them?
Perhaps they should have been tried somehow. With an actual trial outcome proving their innocence (or at least not-proving guilt), perhaps some countries would take them.
Have you considered the possibility that their homes don't want them because they were held, for years, without trial in the scary worst-of-the-worst "terrorist prison"?
they are, by and large bad guys.
Are they now? And you know this how? If there ever was a case of [citation required]...
I think for most of them, no one even knows why they are being held. I mean, check out this list. If entries such as "Determined to be innocent. Still detained" or "Ruled innocent. Claims beating crippled him" do not scare you, I don't know what will.
Considering that they are not guaranteed access to evidence against them or proper access to lawyers, the fact that some were still ruled innocent, implies that majority of them are likely innocent.
Not to mention that after someone had been detained for 5-10-15 years without trial in terrible conditions, may just become a terrorist in response to such treatment.
Being able to push OTA updates will only encourage managers to declare projects done then fix things later.
Oh, yes. I can see it now.
Pay only $2.99 per month, to customize your ABS brake response... or to overclock the car's CPU processor... or to prevent it from reporting your movements to nearby police cars.
Under Obama the rules of engagement changed dramatically, the rules now require that there be no known civilian casualties.
You do know that this is achieved by decreeing that all males of military age are automatically considered militants? So the rules achieved "no known civilian casualties" by assuming that if you are killed then you were a militant. (Citation)
The number of civilians killed in strikes has dramatically decreased.
Citation needed -- including who counts as "civilian" in this decrease.
Obama deserves credit for halting the indiscriminate killings with bombs and missiles
Obama has appointed himself as a Judge/Jury/Executioner, and redefined words (such as "imminent threat" or "indiscriminate killings") rather than halted anything. Citation
she actually saw the words 'user refuses to pay' in one of them.
Was there also evidence of why the Illuminati caused 9/11 and keept cold fusion under wraps?
Mysterious corruption is certainly possible, but there is zero reason for them to explicitly admit that they are doing something bad on client side.
jack up taxes any more and you'll see even more assets leave for tax havens.
What makes you think that all assets (that could) did not already leave? Do you think people are keeping their assets here and paying taxes just because they are team players?
There are a few new snippets of information, sure, but there's hardly full transparency; ... We are instead treated to a short blog post littered with links to other pages on the Adblock Plus site, forums pages, and so on.
TFA (as per quote above) is a vague blog post that attempts to describe another vague blog post. Most of TFA is spent admitting that there is very little content to talk about.
but I can see from the other comments you've been shot down pretty well.
Indeed, I have.
Wireless works in Linux.
I believe you when you say it worked for you, but that does not generalize. We are in a rare scenario where anecdotal data actually applies. Assuming you believe me, of course.
Wireless did not work for me ~2 years ago in Debian. Honest. I spent quite a few hours googling things over a couple of days and trying what things Internet recommended, after which I moved on to another flavor of Linux (which had other issues).
There are more than a few webpages online dedicated specifically to helping choose the right chipset/WiFi card properly supported by Linux.
See Debian's Wiki on the topic. "Currently there are only a few modern wifi chipsets readily available that work with free software systems." Do you honestly think that to be equivalent to "Wireless works in Linux"?
I've done 8 or 9 installs of Mint in the last month on a variety of hardware (laptops and desktops) and the wireless functions have worked without a hitch every single time. In fact everything has worked every single time,
I have pretty specifically said that I do not have any direct experience with Linux Mint -- you could at least finish reading my entire post before "calling bullshit" (unless you think I am making everything up?). Personally, I have dealt with Debian, CentOS (mostly) and Ubuntu at various times. Trying to get wireless to work was a Debian problem. Message boards seemed to suggest kernel recompilation -- I am not even saying it had to be done, I am saying that's what Google research showed at the time.
Not knowing which flavor of Linux to install is actually the first problem I have encountered when setting up a new machine with Linux. If everyone here swears by it, Linux Mint may be the one I used next time.
Bullshit for very large values of bullshit. I haven't had wireless not work: on any installs I've done in the last 8-10 years now.
I think this is one rare example where anecdotal data counts. I am not saying it never works. It clearly worked for you. Perhaps you did your research in choosing the WiFi card first (I did not).
First Google page hit on debian wireless not working supports my claim. I am not saying it is Linux's fault, but there appears to be consensus on wiki.debian.org that "Wifi has always been a problem for free software users. USB Wifi cards are becoming less free."
if access to the data on the phone could potentially save lives
That's not really an argument, but more of a random statement.
Keeping everyone sedated and locked up in a room when they are not at work could also potentially save a lot of lives (by keeping some perpetrators and many potential victims off the streets). But we are not planning to do that either.
I'm sure if it came with Linux Mint preinstalled an awful lot of people wouldn't even notice, because Gmail would work fine.
Not until they want wireless to work -- and are then told on all discussion forums that they have to recompile the kernel for that. I am sure they will notice the difference then
I know it will cost me some karma (and that everyone's grandma uses Linux now). I also do not know Linux Mint, but I run into things like this all the time with other flavors.
"For X to work, need to install these 15 libraries, some of which have to be compiled from source or installed from custom repositories that have to be identified and configured first" (CentOS).
"Wireless USB card will not work unless you follow these instructions to recompile the kernel" (Debian, a couple of years ago).
Ok, now you can downmod me and pretend that what I say isn't true. But these are my actual experiences.
This is the price of "free" MS upgrades.
MS Win10 upgrade has outgrown the "free upgrade" category a while ago.
It is now firmly in "shoved down your throat when you are not looking" category
I have warned all of my immediate non-tech family to ignore "free upgrade" offer, but what if (when!) MS sneaks it in anyway?
Also, it is getting harder to buy a new desktop/laptop without Windows 10 (yes, yes, I know, year of the Linux is upon us, blah blah).
This one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
3. For those systems where advertisers bid the suppliers for who gets displayed, the end user can sit doing nothing while the site owners wait for some "optimum" bid.
The webpage is literally sitting there hanging because some random ad website is not responding now. If that doesn't show how little companies care about users, I don't know what does.
I remember a period when Blockbuster.com page used to stop dead for 5-10 seconds trying to contact some Facebook sub-domain, and it drove me crazy every time.
Lemmy only lived to 70. How long would he have lived without the booze and speed?
How much would he have lived without booze and speed?
Wikipedia claims that he died from aggressive cancer.
Therefore, he probably would have lived to about 70 either way.
Just shows how ignorant most of our American population is with technology.
This debate doesn't have so much to do with technology, though. Concept is simple enough [insert car--encryption analogy]
It's like all those senators doing bad things under the guise of "they are old people who just don't understand technology". They may not know the low-level technical details, but they certainly understand the relevant concepts in the crafted law, they just don't care about our opinion.
From a user's perspective, isn't the sidebar an ideal place for ads so they don't mix in with search results?
No, research shows that users would prefer to see ads mixed in with links (link - ad - link - ad). It is even better if links jump around under your mouse or at least regularly obscured with a surprise overlay banner "subscribe here!".
Users only liked unobtrusive ads in the 90s -- tastes have clearly changed.