I'd rather have 2-3TB at a price that's not going to leave me eating ramen for the next few months than a 15TB that's going to leave me eating ramen for the two years.
Actually, I'd like to be able to afford two. Redundancy and all...
"Get over it" is a little different from "not harm additional children". It's also hard for most adults to get past the feelings of horror at the things done to children to the point where they could address the illness behind it.
It's even an issue before somebody is convicted. If Bob Smith the drama teacher has been accused of sexual assault, do you release details to various people saying "Bob is accused of X" so other victims may come forward, or do you keep it private so that Bob doesn't get his name splashed through the paper for a crime he hasn't been convicted of?
It doesn't, and honestly I see good reasons for police and authorities to keep track of these persons mainly due to the recidivism rates. However, there's a difference between posting their info out where any vigilante can see, and keeping things on police record. That's a really hard one for some of these crimes.
If a guy committed a crime of passion (say punched somebody in a fight and killed him), served time in good behaviour, and got out, then I believe we should stop penalizing him once he's served his time, INCLUDING by not having the past charges mar his record for employment purposes.
On the other hand, if somebody is charged with a significant sex offence (and I mean actually an offence, not pissing near a playground), then we probably at least want to have some way to track that he shouldn't be a scout leader or gymnastics instructor. I know they do have some checks here like a "vulnerable persons" check where it grabs stuff that's not in the normal record, so perhaps something like that where things not related to the case-at-hand (job application at McDonalds) don't show up on the record/request.
Not that it's an OLD law, but an outdated law. They're not necessarily the same.
Some things covered by old laws don't change much. Murder, for example, is murder, regardless of whether you use a rock, a gun, or a drone. There are some nuances around intent etc but overall it's much the same.
In this case though, this law itself is somewhat nuanced, dated, and was created before some of the most important factors of US law and government even existed.
Sonsonic PSU's are awesome. I have a 2u server where I needed a power supply that didn't have a bottom fan intake (would be blocked by the case). The only one I could find that fit was a Seasonic but it's been rock-solid for years without an issues. Quiet and reliable. A bit pricey but you're paying for a quality product.
When this law was made, George Washington was literally still president, the US Supreme court had not yet convened for the first time, and Vermont wasn't even a state yet.
Courts have "interpreted" in such a way to trim it down to Constitutional scope.It FEELS like this use of it SHOULD be unconstitutional, but how so?
In 1789, the constitution hadn't even been ratified yet (that didn't occur until May, 1790)
Hell, during this time the US government was still fighting Native Indians with the help of the bloody British.
To say that this law is outdated and out-of-place in this current era of technology and rights is a massive understatement.
Where do you get your numbers from? *nobody* is paying 90% taxes, and certainly not those who can afford the tax consultants to find loopholes and deductions.
*terrible* for many means less FPS on major titles while running three 1080p monitors. In my experience if I would have noticed those FPS then the game probably wasn't running particularly well in windows either.
One thing I have noticed is that load-times in Linux can actually be faster depending on the filesystem used.
"managers got reports of who contributed and who didn't"
If they do allow it, then it should be like voting: nobody knows if you did donate or how much. Anything else is subject to abuse even if they say they're just "asking"
Let us also not forget that percentages lie quite handily. Let's say you got a 5% raise every year for a decade. Well, if you were making $150k/year, you'd be up to about $240k/year. Overall you've gone up nearly 100 grand per year. That's not too bad, and while you're not up with overall "inflation" one should keep in mind that a lot of those prices are loaded at the bottom end for things like groceries and gas, stuff that at $150k you're probably not going too bad for.
Now if you're making only $30k/year. Congratulations, after slugging it out you've not made it up to near 49k/year. You've got up about $19,000. Except at $49k, the cost of those student loans, groceries, mortgages and car payments still hurt *a lot*
Now the median US income is about $52,000. That's per household though, so you and your spouse would have had to nail those 5% raises each and every year to get from there to $81,500... an increase of $31,000. It's not bad, but you'd still better hope those loans were paid off early and you don't need a new car.
Realistically though, you didn't get those raises. The median household income 10 years ago was $46,000. Now it's about $52,000 so all those happy people got the rough equivalent of a yearly 1.1% raise over the last decade.
The good news is that if you saved up to buy a house now... *that* is possibly a bit cheaper than in 2006.
Of course if you bought 10 years ago, that was at the top of the bubble and you've lost value while paying a nice mortgage rate of 6.4% (4.45% after a 5yr renewal). That means on a $200k mortgage you would have paid nearly $100k in just interest alone already. Ouch
Well, if that's an example of a typical Steam box sale, with an "NVIDIAIDIA GeForce GTX GPU 2GB GDDR5" (their spelling, not mine, and no mention of the actual model) graphics co-processor it's no wonder...
I wonder if they're planning on using this to track criminals such as child pornography creators etc online. It would certainly be a good use for this. I doubt it's accurate enough to capture a house etc (unless somebody was dumb enough to have other pics in the same house/room), but it might help regionalize it.
I remember reading that some guy had gotten out of CP charges based on some malware that was on his phone. It wasn't provable that he was the one that had actually done the downloading, and his computer was riddled with Malware.
I've personally seen infected user computers which were downloading or visiting sites like crazy in the background without the users' knowledge. The only thing they knew was that the computer was "being slow" so I was called for service.
Yeah, this seems to be a result of one of these factors: a) Tor lets good people do good things anonymously so as to avoid persecution b) Tor lets bad people do bad things anonymously so as to avoid persecution
In this case, a lot of site would either legitimately block Tor or add extra hoops to stop (b). The same thing that lets some dude avoid censorship in his country also lets another dude attack somebody's site while obscuring his origin.
I say leave them up, but start messing with them in useful was. * Post events for a "Secret ISIS Supporters meeting at time X in place Y", kindly inform the FBI to be present * Make sure all the targeted ads are for male enhancement and pork products * Start messing with the messages in insidious ways, adding confusion to anyone following. * Identify/track members to assist law enforcement
Yup. Just like how asset forfeiture started out by nailing those bad drug dealers who were making money off of selling drugs to our kids. Fast forward and you've got cops stealing people's sh*t like gangsters under the same rules.
Or how about Stingrays (used for the parallel construction you've mentioned)? Those things would only be used to catch really dangerous terrorist types, right? Hell, with all the secrecy and backdoor-buddy'ism behind that we can't even *get* records of where those are being used, but 2000 cases got dropped because of them. It's not like they can't use the tools, they just need to get a f***ing warrant, but don't.
Let us not forget all the cases of other compromised internet security devices with suspicious circumstances behind them. Do we truly believe that none of those track back to certain 3-letter agencies.
Land of the free only seems to apply when it's government agencies having a free-for-all with your privacy.
They've started to care more recently, but it may be too late. They have a recent initiative to stamp out fake download buttons, but it's been an issue for years (as has the malware). It's like trying to get your customers back after a restaurant has been closed multiple times for rodent infestation, health-code violations, and servers who flipped people off when they complained of seeing their burgers dropped on the ground...
The ironic part is that - if anyone - Google has the most potential to become as close to a "good" advertiser that anyone could be. Realistically, I think that "good" advertising would * Show stuff that people want, or would likely be interested in * In moderation * In in a fairly unobtrusive way * For shit I want, not shit I bought * In a safe and honest manner
Slashdot has, traditionally, done a fairly good job of the first one by me. Of course since their demographic is fairly well known (Geeks/Nerds), it's not that hard. I can't say I'm thrilled with some of the ad choices, especially videos (autoplay videos=spawn of hell), but overall most of them have been acceptable.
Now a lot of sites prefer to use pump out ads in a volume that simply makes them noise. Any of the general-consumption headliner sites are like this, ESPECIALLY for mobile (and yes, the slashdot mobile site is worse than desktop too) with short blurbs surrounded by or encasing ads... and a bunch of a "Next' buttons to drive clicks through the ads. No moderation there
Unobtrusive follows moderation, but it's also about placement and not volume. Again, I don't mind an ad for some cool geek stuff in the top-right corner, and it's even gotten some clicks or purchases from me in the past. But a page peppered with ads is like a lawn peppered with dog-sh*t, it might be a very nice lawn but all you notice is the sh*t.
Also, how f***ing hard is it to NOT try and sell me a pair of boots based on the fact that I went to Amazon/eBay and already bought... a pair of boots (ok, in my case it's probably a USB device or a video game, but hey). I don't need two pairs of the same damn boots. I bought it already. It's like buying a coke from a vending machine and then as you walk away drinking your coke, a giant billboard pops up and says, "Hey Phorm, you'd probably enjoy a nice cold coke". I mean, no sh*t, that's why I bought one and/or am drinking it right f***ing now.
Safe and honest. Well pretty much everyone has FAILED big time here. Google is definitely included: * Ads faked to look like legit elements of a page (e.g. Download buttons). * Ads containing drive-by malware. * Ads linking to malware (usually with said fake button). * Ads that go to redirect loops. * Ads with a city Geotag (pretty much any "[your location] guy makes a $8,000/week from home and you can do" or "doctors hate [your location] mom who discovered this one great trick"). Anything with a geotag is likely trash * Legit software bundled with stuff that makes your PC pop out ads (*cough* sourceforge *cough*, at least that's getting fixed) * Legit software with pre-checked boxes for other shit (Flash/Java are big culprits here)
So why could Google do better? Well frankly, if their mining and profiling haven't f***ing figured what I want (or at least something close), then they have FAILED. Not stuff I already just bought. Not a fake button to malware on the page of something I actually wanted to download. Not a diet, a retirement kit, skin treatment, or feminine hygiene products. This isn't f***ing TV where you throw an ad for some dreck on near the Superbowl and hope that 5% of the millions of people watching happen to be in your target demographic (unless your selling natchos or something, then you're probably doing pretty good there). You CAN individualize the advertising experience and profit without massively pissing people off. You've GOT the bloody data. Use it properly! Frankly if I'm still seeing ads for f***ing Viagra or old-people's lube products, then whatever you've been doing obviously has nothing to do with ads and I can only assume that you're really collecting my data for the NSA or something.
Beyond that... Google has the power to run massive analytics, maps, and many more hugely intensive endeavours, but they can't weed out the malware and fake downloads buttons? Either they're failing because your software is built on a broken platform, or they're failing because they just don't f***ing try.
Slashdot Mirror
It was never presented at sale, nor signed off on. The terms are also onerous.
They can put whatever they want in the EULA, but it doesn't mean it's enforceable.
I'd rather have 2-3TB at a price that's not going to leave me eating ramen for the next few months than a 15TB that's going to leave me eating ramen for the two years.
Actually, I'd like to be able to afford two. Redundancy and all...
"Get over it" is a little different from "not harm additional children". It's also hard for most adults to get past the feelings of horror at the things done to children to the point where they could address the illness behind it.
It's even an issue before somebody is convicted. If Bob Smith the drama teacher has been accused of sexual assault, do you release details to various people saying "Bob is accused of X" so other victims may come forward, or do you keep it private so that Bob doesn't get his name splashed through the paper for a crime he hasn't been convicted of?
It doesn't, and honestly I see good reasons for police and authorities to keep track of these persons mainly due to the recidivism rates. However, there's a difference between posting their info out where any vigilante can see, and keeping things on police record. That's a really hard one for some of these crimes.
If a guy committed a crime of passion (say punched somebody in a fight and killed him), served time in good behaviour, and got out, then I believe we should stop penalizing him once he's served his time, INCLUDING by not having the past charges mar his record for employment purposes.
On the other hand, if somebody is charged with a significant sex offence (and I mean actually an offence, not pissing near a playground), then we probably at least want to have some way to track that he shouldn't be a scout leader or gymnastics instructor. I know they do have some checks here like a "vulnerable persons" check where it grabs stuff that's not in the normal record, so perhaps something like that where things not related to the case-at-hand (job application at McDonalds) don't show up on the record/request.
Not that it's an OLD law, but an outdated law. They're not necessarily the same.
Some things covered by old laws don't change much. Murder, for example, is murder, regardless of whether you use a rock, a gun, or a drone. There are some nuances around intent etc but overall it's much the same.
In this case though, this law itself is somewhat nuanced, dated, and was created before some of the most important factors of US law and government even existed.
Sonsonic PSU's are awesome. I have a 2u server where I needed a power supply that didn't have a bottom fan intake (would be blocked by the case). The only one I could find that fit was a Seasonic but it's been rock-solid for years without an issues. Quiet and reliable. A bit pricey but you're paying for a quality product.
It's not just the sale price, but what you can accomplish when this process is doable on-the-fly and/or portable.
When this law was made, George Washington was literally still president, the US Supreme court had not yet convened for the first time, and Vermont wasn't even a state yet.
Courts have "interpreted" in such a way to trim it down to Constitutional scope.It FEELS like this use of it SHOULD be unconstitutional, but how so?
In 1789, the constitution hadn't even been ratified yet (that didn't occur until May, 1790)
Hell, during this time the US government was still fighting Native Indians with the help of the bloody British.
To say that this law is outdated and out-of-place in this current era of technology and rights is a massive understatement.
Where do you get your numbers from? *nobody* is paying 90% taxes, and certainly not those who can afford the tax consultants to find loopholes and deductions.
*terrible* for many means less FPS on major titles while running three 1080p monitors. In my experience if I would have noticed those FPS then the game probably wasn't running particularly well in windows either.
One thing I have noticed is that load-times in Linux can actually be faster depending on the filesystem used.
"managers got reports of who contributed and who didn't"
If they do allow it, then it should be like voting: nobody knows if you did donate or how much. Anything else is subject to abuse even if they say they're just "asking"
Either way I'm fairly sure it counts as police harassment, which is also illegal.
Phoning home isn't notable unless you know what it's doing so for. It could be to send information back, or it could just be to just for updates etc.
Let us also not forget that percentages lie quite handily. Let's say you got a 5% raise every year for a decade.
Well, if you were making $150k/year, you'd be up to about $240k/year. Overall you've gone up nearly 100 grand per year. That's not too bad, and while you're not up with overall "inflation" one should keep in mind that a lot of those prices are loaded at the bottom end for things like groceries and gas, stuff that at $150k you're probably not going too bad for.
Now if you're making only $30k/year. Congratulations, after slugging it out you've not made it up to near 49k/year. You've got up about $19,000. Except at $49k, the cost of those student loans, groceries, mortgages and car payments still hurt *a lot*
Now the median US income is about $52,000. That's per household though, so you and your spouse would have had to nail those 5% raises each and every year to get from there to $81,500... an increase of $31,000. It's not bad, but you'd still better hope those loans were paid off early and you don't need a new car.
Realistically though, you didn't get those raises. The median household income 10 years ago was $46,000. Now it's about $52,000 so all those happy people got the rough equivalent of a yearly 1.1% raise over the last decade.
The good news is that if you saved up to buy a house now... *that* is possibly a bit cheaper than in 2006.
Of course if you bought 10 years ago, that was at the top of the bubble and you've lost value while paying a nice mortgage rate of 6.4% (4.45% after a 5yr renewal). That means on a $200k mortgage you would have paid nearly $100k in just interest alone already. Ouch
Well, if that's an example of a typical Steam box sale, with an "NVIDIAIDIA GeForce GTX GPU 2GB GDDR5" (their spelling, not mine, and no mention of the actual model) graphics co-processor it's no wonder...
I wonder if they're planning on using this to track criminals such as child pornography creators etc online. It would certainly be a good use for this. I doubt it's accurate enough to capture a house etc (unless somebody was dumb enough to have other pics in the same house/room), but it might help regionalize it.
I remember reading that some guy had gotten out of CP charges based on some malware that was on his phone. It wasn't provable that he was the one that had actually done the downloading, and his computer was riddled with Malware.
I've personally seen infected user computers which were downloading or visiting sites like crazy in the background without the users' knowledge. The only thing they knew was that the computer was "being slow" so I was called for service.
Yeah, this seems to be a result of one of these factors:
a) Tor lets good people do good things anonymously so as to avoid persecution
b) Tor lets bad people do bad things anonymously so as to avoid persecution
In this case, a lot of site would either legitimately block Tor or add extra hoops to stop (b). The same thing that lets some dude avoid censorship in his country also lets another dude attack somebody's site while obscuring his origin.
I say leave them up, but start messing with them in useful was.
* Post events for a "Secret ISIS Supporters meeting at time X in place Y", kindly inform the FBI to be present
* Make sure all the targeted ads are for male enhancement and pork products
* Start messing with the messages in insidious ways, adding confusion to anyone following.
* Identify/track members to assist law enforcement
Yup. Just like how asset forfeiture started out by nailing those bad drug dealers who were making money off of selling drugs to our kids. Fast forward and you've got cops stealing people's sh*t like gangsters under the same rules.
Or how about Stingrays (used for the parallel construction you've mentioned)? Those things would only be used to catch really dangerous terrorist types, right? Hell, with all the secrecy and backdoor-buddy'ism behind that we can't even *get* records of where those are being used, but 2000 cases got dropped because of them. It's not like they can't use the tools, they just need to get a f***ing warrant, but don't.
Let us not forget all the cases of other compromised internet security devices with suspicious circumstances behind them. Do we truly believe that none of those track back to certain 3-letter agencies.
Land of the free only seems to apply when it's government agencies having a free-for-all with your privacy.
Yeah, it's funny because I actually felt a bit sorry for the robot. Like it was being picked on.
I also felt this strange sense that it was going to up and whack that guy in the head.
If the robots ever attain sentience and rise, this guy is going to get a beating!
On the purchase page.
"Designed for use and service in Europe only"
Well there goes that.
They've started to care more recently, but it may be too late. They have a recent initiative to stamp out fake download buttons, but it's been an issue for years (as has the malware). It's like trying to get your customers back after a restaurant has been closed multiple times for rodent infestation, health-code violations, and servers who flipped people off when they complained of seeing their burgers dropped on the ground...
The ironic part is that - if anyone - Google has the most potential to become as close to a "good" advertiser that anyone could be. Realistically, I think that "good" advertising would
* Show stuff that people want, or would likely be interested in
* In moderation
* In in a fairly unobtrusive way
* For shit I want, not shit I bought
* In a safe and honest manner
Slashdot has, traditionally, done a fairly good job of the first one by me. Of course since their demographic is fairly well known (Geeks/Nerds), it's not that hard. I can't say I'm thrilled with some of the ad choices, especially videos (autoplay videos=spawn of hell), but overall most of them have been acceptable.
Now a lot of sites prefer to use pump out ads in a volume that simply makes them noise. Any of the general-consumption headliner sites are like this, ESPECIALLY for mobile (and yes, the slashdot mobile site is worse than desktop too) with short blurbs surrounded by or encasing ads... and a bunch of a "Next' buttons to drive clicks through the ads. No moderation there
Unobtrusive follows moderation, but it's also about placement and not volume. Again, I don't mind an ad for some cool geek stuff in the top-right corner, and it's even gotten some clicks or purchases from me in the past. But a page peppered with ads is like a lawn peppered with dog-sh*t, it might be a very nice lawn but all you notice is the sh*t.
Also, how f***ing hard is it to NOT try and sell me a pair of boots based on the fact that I went to Amazon/eBay and already bought... a pair of boots (ok, in my case it's probably a USB device or a video game, but hey). I don't need two pairs of the same damn boots. I bought it already. It's like buying a coke from a vending machine and then as you walk away drinking your coke, a giant billboard pops up and says, "Hey Phorm, you'd probably enjoy a nice cold coke". I mean, no sh*t, that's why I bought one and/or am drinking it right f***ing now.
Safe and honest. Well pretty much everyone has FAILED big time here. Google is definitely included:
* Ads faked to look like legit elements of a page (e.g. Download buttons).
* Ads containing drive-by malware.
* Ads linking to malware (usually with said fake button).
* Ads that go to redirect loops.
* Ads with a city Geotag (pretty much any "[your location] guy makes a $8,000/week from home and you can do" or "doctors hate [your location] mom who discovered this one great trick"). Anything with a geotag is likely trash
* Legit software bundled with stuff that makes your PC pop out ads (*cough* sourceforge *cough*, at least that's getting fixed)
* Legit software with pre-checked boxes for other shit (Flash/Java are big culprits here)
So why could Google do better? Well frankly, if their mining and profiling haven't f***ing figured what I want (or at least something close), then they have FAILED. Not stuff I already just bought. Not a fake button to malware on the page of something I actually wanted to download. Not a diet, a retirement kit, skin treatment, or feminine hygiene products. This isn't f***ing TV where you throw an ad for some dreck on near the Superbowl and hope that 5% of the millions of people watching happen to be in your target demographic (unless your selling natchos or something, then you're probably doing pretty good there). You CAN individualize the advertising experience and profit without massively pissing people off. You've GOT the bloody data. Use it properly! Frankly if I'm still seeing ads for f***ing Viagra or old-people's lube products, then whatever you've been doing obviously has nothing to do with ads and I can only assume that you're really collecting my data for the NSA or something.
Beyond that... Google has the power to run massive analytics, maps, and many more hugely intensive endeavours, but they can't weed out the malware and fake downloads buttons? Either they're failing because your software is built on a broken platform, or they're failing because they just don't f***ing try.
Oh