I'm all for more privacy for social networking users
What part of "social network" does Bennett not understand? If you use these damn "services" then you should expect them to be doing shit like this. I'm much more concerned that almost every site that I visit lately sends traffic to Facebook and lets them track information about me, even though I have never and will never use facebook.
I absolutely hate trying to help friends or relatives resolve computer problems, only to find that the computer is infested with McAfee software that has to be dealt with first, or in some cases is the main problem. Sadly users have been brainwashed into thinking that they need this crap and is is somehow good for them. But John is far from innocent in all of this, there were serious problems even back when he had full control of what the software that bears his name did.
I was a big X10 user decades go. Did see a much higher than expected failure rate on the modules. But it stopped working for me as I added more and more surge protectors and UPSs to my home. And that is not saying that the transmitters or modules were on surge protection devices. Just having one or two on the same circuit seemed to be enough to damp out the signal, particularly if the xmitter and receiver were not on the same breaker (which pretty much meant they had to be in the same room for me).
I believe that there are no time travelers because every time that someone invents a time traveling machine, eventually some idiot goes back to before the machine is invented and does something that stops the machine from being invented.
It is a major inconvenience when watching shows that have an on-going story line. You either have to watch the episodes out of order or stop watching the broadcast shows all together and watch all on-line if you miss even one episode. And what in the world does it accomplish for ABC? It only makes over-the-air broadcast TV less attractive to viewers. It hurts local affiliates (if viewers choose to just watch the rest of the season on-line 8 days later when they miss an episode). ABC just annoys people with this with no up side.
The first season of the V remake was available on-line on ABC. I missed the first episode of the second season. Actually realized it was on about 40 minutes in (hard to get back into the fall schedule after the summer break), but said to myself, "Oh well, I'll catch up tomorrow." I tried to watch it the next day and found that ABC wasn't making V available on-line any longer. I said "screw it" and didn't watch any episode after that.
I expect this will happen more and more as they alienate viewers.
Many network shows are indeed serials (CBS's Hostages, ABC's Scandal or NBC's Blacklist or Revolution, for example), but many other are self contained main stories but still have on-going back stories that develop over time even though each episode usually wraps up the main story line. In fact, I'm hard pressed to think of anything that I watch other than PBS science shows and The Simpsons that don't have some running background stories that are impacted by watching out of order.
As to why I don't use a DVR, reread my original post, I get my TV through free air broadcast. There are few decent DVR solutions that work without being part of a cable or satellite system. I actually do sometimes use a PC based TV tuner and software, but this isn't a perfect solution (both because of show times changing due to sports or other "events", and because free air reception isn't always completely reliable. Plus, of course, that only allows me to record one show in any one time slot, which is overly restrictive (and networks are getting more sloppy about start and end times, so it can be hard to switch between stations and not chop off the end of a show or the start of the next show).
The network seems to still be perfectly willing to offer on-line access to the shows, but just wants to make it more inconvenient to the viewer. Why?
I get most of my TV over the air, meaning that I mainly watch the networks. But occasionally life takes priority over TV watching and I end up watching a show that I missed on-line. But almost all (or maybe all) of the shows that I watch have running story lines spanning the episodes. I've missed an episode in the past and when I found that I couldn't watch an episode on-line before the next episode aired (or even couldn't watch it at all), I've just decides "screw it" and quit watching the show. What does ABC think they are accomplishing by only letting viewers who pay someone else see the episodes in order in a timely manner? Why in the world would they do something that can only drive more viewers away from broadcast TV?
It isn't a question of ALLOWING it. It is a question of REWARDING it. Just more proof that the government is not working for the benefit of the people anymore.
it is clear that Assange or his associates would have to have installed recording devices....
Hold on. They conclude that from Assange suddenly stating "Jesus Christ. I think that we have recordings of all phone calls to and from the Icelandic parliament during the past four months"???????? How can anyone honestly conclude that? Assange seems to express surprise when he realizes what he has, surprise that he would not have if he had been wiretapping and recording. Assange was routinely getting leaked information. My conclusion would be that someone leaked this information to him, not that he had been wiretapping Iceland. And who do we know that has been spying on their friends and enemies alike, along with their own citizens? I'll give you a clue, it is someone with a 3 letter name that a whistle blower might want to expose.
Or to put it another way, nothing will get fixed as long as the software architect is as gutless as his management and just posts as an anonymous coward and helps conceal the problem. Sure, you don't have to commit carer suicide by saying "I'm the guy in the third office on the east wall and I've been reporting all of these problems to Bob but he just lets them slide, here's how to hack our toys", but you could put minimal effort into letting the problems slip out and help the public become aware of them. The hackers likely know about them anyway, management has decided that they don't care, as long as the public doesn't know. When the public knows they will become interested in fixing it.
What I take from the summary (and based on the summary I will NOT read the article) is a claim that no third world country can help itself, and it must be given at least that magic 15% to join civilized society. Even though they may be freely given knowledge such as medical research that the developed world has spent money to develope. I reject that as complete liberal bullshit. I further reject the implication that if the money is given that it will help, and not be stolen by the few in power. I've seen over and over again that things just don't work that way.
What I find offensive here is the dual standard being applied. There are plenty of apps on the poorly named "Play Store" that openly state that they require the user to Root the device. And others relating to Rooting or encouraging Rooting by offering more features if the device is Rooted. Why are not all of those considered to be encouraging the users to be voiding their warranties? This looks to me like this one application was selectively targeted and then a reason was fabricated that contradicts with many of the other thing that I see openly offered.
Let us give thanks that the United States is going to protect us from those dirty third world countries that want to impose basic human rights of privacy on us.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Why stop with just hidden compartments that drug runners use? I happen to know (meaning I've seen it on TV) that drug dealers keep drugs in safes, so we should outlaw those too. And safety deposit boxes too. And don't even get me started on those tricky boxes that stage magicians have, they might be used to conceal something.
1 in 7 people in the world have some sort of disability, (including the fact that 1 in every 10 U.S. children has been diagnosed with ADHD)
Didn't even need to read the whole review, let alone the book. The first summary was enough. I'm sure that he could even get those figures looking worse, why not include other popular trending disabilities like peanut allergies and "Celiac disease"? I also feel that being a dyslexic white male with a bad attitude should entitle me to one of those reserved parking spots.
Both can be more expensive to maintain if you keep the car long enough to replace the batteries. If you don't keep it that long then it becomes the next chump's problem, but you still feel it in reduced resale value.
Pure electrics have a serious problem with range. A multi-car family might be able to work with that for one of the cars, but a single person gets screwed. And they really get screwed if they have a second car that they use for longer trips, they end up being forced to buy liability insurance on each car, even though they can only drive one at a time. Note that I'm talking about the required liability insurance here, not the usually optional collision or comprehensive insurance. And I don't believe the big lie that the insurance is on the car, not the driver. Get a teen-age driver in the family and watch what happens to the liability insurance rate on the same car, or get points on you license or a DUI. The insurance is clearly on the driver, but that driver has to pay for it again if he wants a spare car to resolve the range problem. There is no way that I would ever buy an electric car (or even a tiny high mileage gas powered car with no carrying capacity) unless the lawmakers stop taking their instructions from insurance company campaign donations and clear up this insurance company windfall.
Yea, but this one doesn't phone home.Thanks to a "National Security Letter" it phones directly to the NSA. Not that it maters, since the NSA is closely monitoring all of the TOR portals anyway.
Security Theater, it's not just for airports anymore.
I would, but look what happened to the last brave American who tried that. I don't want to have to seek asylum in Russia and ask some crime ridden South American country to take me in, nor watch my back every minute for the U.S. agents trying to kidnap or kill me. The President talked big about protecting whistle blowers before this happened, but then all of that was quietly removed from his website Everyone of us that actually has the proof knows better than show it to you.
Slashdot Mirror
If only they already had some kind of meltdown that had already happened that they could learn from.
I'm all for more privacy for social networking users
What part of "social network" does Bennett not understand? If you use these damn "services" then you should expect them to be doing shit like this. I'm much more concerned that almost every site that I visit lately sends traffic to Facebook and lets them track information about me, even though I have never and will never use facebook.
I absolutely hate trying to help friends or relatives resolve computer problems, only to find that the computer is infested with McAfee software that has to be dealt with first, or in some cases is the main problem. Sadly users have been brainwashed into thinking that they need this crap and is is somehow good for them. But John is far from innocent in all of this, there were serious problems even back when he had full control of what the software that bears his name did.
It would be a bargain at 1/10th the price.
I was a big X10 user decades go. Did see a much higher than expected failure rate on the modules. But it stopped working for me as I added more and more surge protectors and UPSs to my home. And that is not saying that the transmitters or modules were on surge protection devices. Just having one or two on the same circuit seemed to be enough to damp out the signal, particularly if the xmitter and receiver were not on the same breaker (which pretty much meant they had to be in the same room for me).
I believe that there are no time travelers because every time that someone invents a time traveling machine, eventually some idiot goes back to before the machine is invented and does something that stops the machine from being invented.
It is a major inconvenience when watching shows that have an on-going story line. You either have to watch the episodes out of order or stop watching the broadcast shows all together and watch all on-line if you miss even one episode. And what in the world does it accomplish for ABC? It only makes over-the-air broadcast TV less attractive to viewers. It hurts local affiliates (if viewers choose to just watch the rest of the season on-line 8 days later when they miss an episode). ABC just annoys people with this with no up side.
The first season of the V remake was available on-line on ABC. I missed the first episode of the second season. Actually realized it was on about 40 minutes in (hard to get back into the fall schedule after the summer break), but said to myself, "Oh well, I'll catch up tomorrow." I tried to watch it the next day and found that ABC wasn't making V available on-line any longer. I said "screw it" and didn't watch any episode after that.
I expect this will happen more and more as they alienate viewers.
Many network shows are indeed serials (CBS's Hostages, ABC's Scandal or NBC's Blacklist or Revolution, for example), but many other are self contained main stories but still have on-going back stories that develop over time even though each episode usually wraps up the main story line. In fact, I'm hard pressed to think of anything that I watch other than PBS science shows and The Simpsons that don't have some running background stories that are impacted by watching out of order.
As to why I don't use a DVR, reread my original post, I get my TV through free air broadcast. There are few decent DVR solutions that work without being part of a cable or satellite system. I actually do sometimes use a PC based TV tuner and software, but this isn't a perfect solution (both because of show times changing due to sports or other "events", and because free air reception isn't always completely reliable. Plus, of course, that only allows me to record one show in any one time slot, which is overly restrictive (and networks are getting more sloppy about start and end times, so it can be hard to switch between stations and not chop off the end of a show or the start of the next show).
The network seems to still be perfectly willing to offer on-line access to the shows, but just wants to make it more inconvenient to the viewer. Why?
I get most of my TV over the air, meaning that I mainly watch the networks. But occasionally life takes priority over TV watching and I end up watching a show that I missed on-line. But almost all (or maybe all) of the shows that I watch have running story lines spanning the episodes. I've missed an episode in the past and when I found that I couldn't watch an episode on-line before the next episode aired (or even couldn't watch it at all), I've just decides "screw it" and quit watching the show. What does ABC think they are accomplishing by only letting viewers who pay someone else see the episodes in order in a timely manner? Why in the world would they do something that can only drive more viewers away from broadcast TV?
It isn't a question of ALLOWING it. It is a question of REWARDING it. Just more proof that the government is not working for the benefit of the people anymore.
... I think I see the problem.
I remember Intel doing something like this back in the days of the 386, except without the energy savings.
it is clear that Assange or his associates would have to have installed recording devices....
Hold on. They conclude that from Assange suddenly stating "Jesus Christ. I think that we have recordings of all phone calls to and from the Icelandic parliament during the past four months" ???????? How can anyone honestly conclude that? Assange seems to express surprise when he realizes what he has, surprise that he would not have if he had been wiretapping and recording. Assange was routinely getting leaked information. My conclusion would be that someone leaked this information to him, not that he had been wiretapping Iceland. And who do we know that has been spying on their friends and enemies alike, along with their own citizens? I'll give you a clue, it is someone with a 3 letter name that a whistle blower might want to expose.
Or to put it another way, nothing will get fixed as long as the software architect is as gutless as his management and just posts as an anonymous coward and helps conceal the problem. Sure, you don't have to commit carer suicide by saying "I'm the guy in the third office on the east wall and I've been reporting all of these problems to Bob but he just lets them slide, here's how to hack our toys", but you could put minimal effort into letting the problems slip out and help the public become aware of them. The hackers likely know about them anyway, management has decided that they don't care, as long as the public doesn't know. When the public knows they will become interested in fixing it.
What I take from the summary (and based on the summary I will NOT read the article) is a claim that no third world country can help itself, and it must be given at least that magic 15% to join civilized society. Even though they may be freely given knowledge such as medical research that the developed world has spent money to develope. I reject that as complete liberal bullshit. I further reject the implication that if the money is given that it will help, and not be stolen by the few in power. I've seen over and over again that things just don't work that way.
What I find offensive here is the dual standard being applied. There are plenty of apps on the poorly named "Play Store" that openly state that they require the user to Root the device. And others relating to Rooting or encouraging Rooting by offering more features if the device is Rooted. Why are not all of those considered to be encouraging the users to be voiding their warranties? This looks to me like this one application was selectively targeted and then a reason was fabricated that contradicts with many of the other thing that I see openly offered.
Let us give thanks that the United States is going to protect us from those dirty third world countries that want to impose basic human rights of privacy on us.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Why stop with just hidden compartments that drug runners use? I happen to know (meaning I've seen it on TV) that drug dealers keep drugs in safes, so we should outlaw those too. And safety deposit boxes too. And don't even get me started on those tricky boxes that stage magicians have, they might be used to conceal something.
1 in 7 people in the world have some sort of disability, (including the fact that 1 in every 10 U.S. children has been diagnosed with ADHD)
Didn't even need to read the whole review, let alone the book. The first summary was enough. I'm sure that he could even get those figures looking worse, why not include other popular trending disabilities like peanut allergies and "Celiac disease"? I also feel that being a dyslexic white male with a bad attitude should entitle me to one of those reserved parking spots.
If they are going to be that way with my private data, I'm going to stop using their service.
Are we talking true electric or hybrid here?
Both can be more expensive to maintain if you keep the car long enough to replace the batteries. If you don't keep it that long then it becomes the next chump's problem, but you still feel it in reduced resale value.
Pure electrics have a serious problem with range. A multi-car family might be able to work with that for one of the cars, but a single person gets screwed. And they really get screwed if they have a second car that they use for longer trips, they end up being forced to buy liability insurance on each car, even though they can only drive one at a time. Note that I'm talking about the required liability insurance here, not the usually optional collision or comprehensive insurance. And I don't believe the big lie that the insurance is on the car, not the driver. Get a teen-age driver in the family and watch what happens to the liability insurance rate on the same car, or get points on you license or a DUI. The insurance is clearly on the driver, but that driver has to pay for it again if he wants a spare car to resolve the range problem. There is no way that I would ever buy an electric car (or even a tiny high mileage gas powered car with no carrying capacity) unless the lawmakers stop taking their instructions from insurance company campaign donations and clear up this insurance company windfall.
Yea, but this one doesn't phone home.Thanks to a "National Security Letter" it phones directly to the NSA. Not that it maters, since the NSA is closely monitoring all of the TOR portals anyway.
Security Theater, it's not just for airports anymore.
Their phone number is (866) 598-4296. They will pay for the call for you to call them and tell them what you think.
SHOW ME THE PROOF
I would, but look what happened to the last brave American who tried that. I don't want to have to seek asylum in Russia and ask some crime ridden South American country to take me in, nor watch my back every minute for the U.S. agents trying to kidnap or kill me. The President talked big about protecting whistle blowers before this happened, but then all of that was quietly removed from his website Everyone of us that actually has the proof knows better than show it to you.