The reason language matters to me is that certain jobs are primarily in certain languages (or group of related languages). If software is best written in COBOL, I don't want to touch it, no matter what language. Currently, I'm working in C++ because that's what the software is written in, and it's very interesting software to work with. Back when the software was new, C++ was the only reasonable language to write it in.
If you think different languages are a matter of syntax, I'm going to strongly recommend that you learn some version of Lisp or Scheme, Prolog, and Haskell. At least one of them. You need a broader perspective.
Could you necessarily tell the difference? Perhaps our hypothetical transporter is invented accidentally by someone who doesn't quite understand what happens. Would you be able to tell the difference through the results of the process?
Okay, what are you denying? Are you denying that Russians interfered with the election? That Sanders' run hurt Clinton overall? That Stein pulled votes away from Clinton? That Comey released a "Look at this! Well, apparently nothing." late in October? That it was a close election that could have been changed by a few hundred thousand votes in a few key states? Let's discuss the facts.
Except that, as I understand it, Microsoft USA has full access to the data. Therefore, the court is ordering employees of Microsoft USA to do something on US soil. that would be illegal if Microsoft Ireland tried it in Ireland. The court is requiring absolutely nothing from anyone outside US borders, and it does have jurisdiction in the US.
There's a good argument to be made that the actual geographic location of the servers is irrelevant to the US court, and it seems clear to me that a court could order someone in the US to do something that might be illegal elsewhere.
I wouldn't be surprised if a US court could order a US person in the US to commit something that would be a crime in another country. There are some pretty strange laws all over the globe. Therefore, Microsoft USA has no option but to try to collect the data. Similarly, Microsoft Ireland has no legal option but to not cooperate. If it were a matter of someone in Microsoft USA trying to get someone in Microsoft Ireland to break the law, it would be simple: Microsoft Ireland obeys the local laws.
However, if Microsoft USA has direct access to the Microsoft Ireland data, things get more interesting. The US court has jurisdiction in the US. The action of bringing that data to the US and turning it over would violate Irish law. So, nobody in Ireland broke Irish law in the specific action of getting that data.
Now, whether Microsoft Ireland broke the law by making confidential data automatically available to Microsoft USA is an interesting question.
My guess is that Microsoft is arguing this hard, because they know that, if they are forced to get the data, European countries will start passing laws forbidding private data to be automatically shared outside the EU, and that would complicate things for Microsoft.
My iPhone 4 was a great advance over my original iPhone. My 5S was a big improvement over my 4. My 5S still works nicely, with the latest iOS, and there isn't really that much in the new iPhones that entices me. (In the meantime, they made everything but the SE too big to fit in my shirt pockets.)
We reached a point where four-year-old computers were good enough for almost everyone, and PC sales flattened or dipped. We're doing the same thing with smartphones.
Typing "clinton fbi immunity" gives me a couple of pages of results about Clinton aides who wanted immunity. This is standard practice in an investigation: give immunity to the little fish in exchange for testimony about the bigger fishes. (Also, if you've got immunity, you can be required to testify about illegal things you did, since the Fifth's clause about self-incrimination only applies if the person in question is or might be on trial.)
You continue to ignore the Mueller investigation. We know the Russians were meddling in the 2016 election, we're finding Trump campaign officials implicated in criminal acts, and we know Trump is heavily involved in Russian business dealings and has, in contrast to every President of my lifetime, refused to divest himself of his holdings or even reveal his finances - and he said he'd do the latter. Nobody outside the investigation knows quite where this is going.
While I don't actually consider evidence and reasoning to be gods, I do believe in them.
Thing is, what he said isn't that far wrong. If you had a qualifying plan, you could keep it, and keep seeing the same doctor. I don't think he quite anticipated how it was going to play out in practice in various states.
Thing is, ambulance rides and ER visits are inherently very expensive. Your family member's problem was insurance, not cost. Legally regulating these costs down to where the bill won't shock the patient will mean these services will be much harder to get. Requiring insurance companies to cover these things with a halfway reasonable copay is the only solution (barring the government paying for it somehow).
Also, the ambulance can't be immediately reused. They frequently transport sick people, you know, and even in something that looks like a simple mechanical problem like a heart attack they don't know about the patient's health. Therefore, things have to be disinfected to avoid endangering the next passenger.
Eh... not really. We could probably find just as much if we looked into the clintons.
False equivalence. Moreover, the Clintons have been investigated extensively, so we have a good idea what they've done, and the Trump campaign and Trump himself are only starting to get that level of scrutiny.
Which you don't have. You have some people getting flustered when harassed by the FBI and you have some dodgy money which at worst will burn one guy... that isn't trump.
You could only say that by claiming to know what Mueller is finding and will find, which is information that should not be available outside the investigation. You're presupposing an outcome and maintaining it's the only one.
If you turned that same focus to Hillary I'm sure you'd find something fishy in the Clinton Foundation or the Uranium One deal or something... To say nothing of the suspicious body count in people that were inconvenient to the Clintons.
Clinton Foundation? Investigated. Uranium One deal? Harmless. Check up on that if you like. Benghazi? Congressional hearing after congressional hearing with no wrongdoing found. The Clintons have been under private and public scrutiny for a long time now. Body count? Care to name a few deaths that have actual evidence of Clinton involvement, since you're so fussy about evidence against Trump?
No, actually, either you're some sort of weirdo or my answer isn't what you fear it is.
It can be very useful to have a SWAT team handy. That's what I said. SWAT teams are perfectly compatible with a free society.
Now, it's possible for a police force to become oppressive, but that can happen with or without SWAT teams. It's possible for a SWAT team to be incorrectly equipped, incorrectly trained, or incorrectly used, and a SWAT team certainly can become a tool of oppression. However, there will be other tools.
So, broadly speaking, if you have a good police force a SWAT team can be useful, and if you have a bad one it really doesn't matter.
I'm still not understanding where you're coming from.
If Apple controls all of the system, Apple can make every feature easier to use. Otherwise, much of the experience is out of Apple's control, and few or no companies feel as strongly about ease of use as Apple.
I don't sync between iPhone and Android. They have distinct uses. I assume there's a way, because somebody's got to have come up with one. There is no more reason for Apple to come up with a universal sync than Google.
There's an obscure feature on the iPhone: it can be used to make phone calls and send and receive standard text messages. Facetime is no more than a video phone conversation. I'm sure I could find one that would work on other devices, but in most cases video important enough for me to worry about.
And I fail to see what's so onerous about having a charging cable for my phone. I"m used to having different chargers for different devices. Should I complain that my Nintendo Switch and iPhone can't share a charging cable without special end?
There's lots and lots of organizations which grant me resources in exchange for money. I need to count my income in USD. I need to pay taxes, fees, and anything else I owe a US government in USD. If I get into a court case, and the judge awards damages, it will almost certainly be a matter of one person being required to pay USD to another. As a result, organizations around here tend to run on USD, even when there's no requirement to. Since the USD is a very important part of the US economy, the US government has a strong interest in keeping it stable.
A store could open up here and only sell things for Euros. It's perfectly legal. I'm pretty sure it's a bad idea, but the US government really doesn't care.
Your first paragraph says that some people are better at some things than other people. Not really a surprising revelation. However, it says nothing about the best distribution of income. Presumably, we want to reward people for doing well, but how much of the GDP should the top 100 get, and the top 100 in what? (I'm not sure how many people can wiggle their ears fully independently, but it can't be all that many. Still, I make my living relying on my less fantastic software development skills rather than my fantastic ear-wiggling skills.)
Communism, as practiced in the Soviet Union, did not try to discourage people from excelling (except when posing a threat to Stalin). Average people in the Soviet Union didn't have the incentive to do their best that average people in the US do, but that didn't really apply to the top people. Soviet science and mathematics were first-rate. They dominated chess for decades. Their consumer technology lagged badly, and actual production was done by people who pretended to work because the enterprise pretended to pay them.
Lots of early rockets didn't really take off for some iterations. We're better now, but Musk was still thinking the Falcon Heavy could explode on or near the pad.
The big problem with launching stuff to LEO is the price. SpaceX is reducing that dramatically. It's doing that partly by recovering first stages and boosters in easily reusable form.
Why don't you name someone accomplishing great things, so I can point to something decades in the past that is sorta similar.
They do. There's no such thing as perfect security. There's got to be flaws somewhere.
What the Secure Enclave mostly does is ensure that the PIN/password can't be brute-forced, and keep the AES-256 key where it can't normally be extracted. This is a massive improvement over the 5C or earlier, but it seems unlikely to me that there's no point of attack. If you're not worried about putting anything back, you can try to figure out things at the hardware level. It won't be easy, and I don't know how practical it is.
An iPhone is in a state much like DRM: the AES-256 key has to be in the phone somehow for it to be useful.
We haven't outsourced civil rights. LEOs would have to send the phones to the company, and that's going to be pretty obvious if done without a warrant.
"Yes, Your Honor, the iPhone accidentally found itself in a shipment to Israel, and somebody, not us, must have paid the company, because imagine our surprise when we found...." To use for that purpose, the LEOs would have to have some sort of method to just take a phone and crack it, not send it to an Israeli company.
Parallel construction is used when they can covertly get information by illegitimate means. This isn't covert.
Slashdot Mirror
The reason language matters to me is that certain jobs are primarily in certain languages (or group of related languages). If software is best written in COBOL, I don't want to touch it, no matter what language. Currently, I'm working in C++ because that's what the software is written in, and it's very interesting software to work with. Back when the software was new, C++ was the only reasonable language to write it in.
If you think different languages are a matter of syntax, I'm going to strongly recommend that you learn some version of Lisp or Scheme, Prolog, and Haskell. At least one of them. You need a broader perspective.
Or being burned in a locomotive. Or ground up and mixed with water and drunk. Not all mummies wound up in museums.
Because too many other people are stupid.
Could you necessarily tell the difference? Perhaps our hypothetical transporter is invented accidentally by someone who doesn't quite understand what happens. Would you be able to tell the difference through the results of the process?
Does using new matter matter? Get down to a low enough level and it's all fungible. One quark or lepton is the same as any other of the same type.
Okay, what are you denying? Are you denying that Russians interfered with the election? That Sanders' run hurt Clinton overall? That Stein pulled votes away from Clinton? That Comey released a "Look at this! Well, apparently nothing." late in October? That it was a close election that could have been changed by a few hundred thousand votes in a few key states? Let's discuss the facts.
Except that, as I understand it, Microsoft USA has full access to the data. Therefore, the court is ordering employees of Microsoft USA to do something on US soil. that would be illegal if Microsoft Ireland tried it in Ireland. The court is requiring absolutely nothing from anyone outside US borders, and it does have jurisdiction in the US.
There's a good argument to be made that the actual geographic location of the servers is irrelevant to the US court, and it seems clear to me that a court could order someone in the US to do something that might be illegal elsewhere.
I wouldn't be surprised if a US court could order a US person in the US to commit something that would be a crime in another country. There are some pretty strange laws all over the globe. Therefore, Microsoft USA has no option but to try to collect the data. Similarly, Microsoft Ireland has no legal option but to not cooperate. If it were a matter of someone in Microsoft USA trying to get someone in Microsoft Ireland to break the law, it would be simple: Microsoft Ireland obeys the local laws.
However, if Microsoft USA has direct access to the Microsoft Ireland data, things get more interesting. The US court has jurisdiction in the US. The action of bringing that data to the US and turning it over would violate Irish law. So, nobody in Ireland broke Irish law in the specific action of getting that data.
Now, whether Microsoft Ireland broke the law by making confidential data automatically available to Microsoft USA is an interesting question.
My guess is that Microsoft is arguing this hard, because they know that, if they are forced to get the data, European countries will start passing laws forbidding private data to be automatically shared outside the EU, and that would complicate things for Microsoft.
My iPhone 4 was a great advance over my original iPhone. My 5S was a big improvement over my 4. My 5S still works nicely, with the latest iOS, and there isn't really that much in the new iPhones that entices me. (In the meantime, they made everything but the SE too big to fit in my shirt pockets.)
We reached a point where four-year-old computers were good enough for almost everyone, and PC sales flattened or dipped. We're doing the same thing with smartphones.
Typing "clinton fbi immunity" gives me a couple of pages of results about Clinton aides who wanted immunity. This is standard practice in an investigation: give immunity to the little fish in exchange for testimony about the bigger fishes. (Also, if you've got immunity, you can be required to testify about illegal things you did, since the Fifth's clause about self-incrimination only applies if the person in question is or might be on trial.)
You continue to ignore the Mueller investigation. We know the Russians were meddling in the 2016 election, we're finding Trump campaign officials implicated in criminal acts, and we know Trump is heavily involved in Russian business dealings and has, in contrast to every President of my lifetime, refused to divest himself of his holdings or even reveal his finances - and he said he'd do the latter. Nobody outside the investigation knows quite where this is going.
While I don't actually consider evidence and reasoning to be gods, I do believe in them.
Thing is, what he said isn't that far wrong. If you had a qualifying plan, you could keep it, and keep seeing the same doctor. I don't think he quite anticipated how it was going to play out in practice in various states.
Thing is, ambulance rides and ER visits are inherently very expensive. Your family member's problem was insurance, not cost. Legally regulating these costs down to where the bill won't shock the patient will mean these services will be much harder to get. Requiring insurance companies to cover these things with a halfway reasonable copay is the only solution (barring the government paying for it somehow).
Also, the ambulance can't be immediately reused. They frequently transport sick people, you know, and even in something that looks like a simple mechanical problem like a heart attack they don't know about the patient's health. Therefore, things have to be disinfected to avoid endangering the next passenger.
So Obama was the first politician ever to say something generally true without enough qualifiers?
The ACA was a very flawed step forward.
False equivalence. Moreover, the Clintons have been investigated extensively, so we have a good idea what they've done, and the Trump campaign and Trump himself are only starting to get that level of scrutiny.
You could only say that by claiming to know what Mueller is finding and will find, which is information that should not be available outside the investigation. You're presupposing an outcome and maintaining it's the only one.
Clinton Foundation? Investigated. Uranium One deal? Harmless. Check up on that if you like. Benghazi? Congressional hearing after congressional hearing with no wrongdoing found. The Clintons have been under private and public scrutiny for a long time now. Body count? Care to name a few deaths that have actual evidence of Clinton involvement, since you're so fussy about evidence against Trump?
No, actually, either you're some sort of weirdo or my answer isn't what you fear it is.
It can be very useful to have a SWAT team handy. That's what I said. SWAT teams are perfectly compatible with a free society.
Now, it's possible for a police force to become oppressive, but that can happen with or without SWAT teams. It's possible for a SWAT team to be incorrectly equipped, incorrectly trained, or incorrectly used, and a SWAT team certainly can become a tool of oppression. However, there will be other tools.
So, broadly speaking, if you have a good police force a SWAT team can be useful, and if you have a bad one it really doesn't matter.
I'm still not understanding where you're coming from.
If Apple controls all of the system, Apple can make every feature easier to use. Otherwise, much of the experience is out of Apple's control, and few or no companies feel as strongly about ease of use as Apple.
I don't sync between iPhone and Android. They have distinct uses. I assume there's a way, because somebody's got to have come up with one. There is no more reason for Apple to come up with a universal sync than Google.
There's an obscure feature on the iPhone: it can be used to make phone calls and send and receive standard text messages. Facetime is no more than a video phone conversation. I'm sure I could find one that would work on other devices, but in most cases video important enough for me to worry about.
And I fail to see what's so onerous about having a charging cable for my phone. I"m used to having different chargers for different devices. Should I complain that my Nintendo Switch and iPhone can't share a charging cable without special end?
There's lots and lots of organizations which grant me resources in exchange for money. I need to count my income in USD. I need to pay taxes, fees, and anything else I owe a US government in USD. If I get into a court case, and the judge awards damages, it will almost certainly be a matter of one person being required to pay USD to another. As a result, organizations around here tend to run on USD, even when there's no requirement to. Since the USD is a very important part of the US economy, the US government has a strong interest in keeping it stable.
A store could open up here and only sell things for Euros. It's perfectly legal. I'm pretty sure it's a bad idea, but the US government really doesn't care.
Your first paragraph says that some people are better at some things than other people. Not really a surprising revelation. However, it says nothing about the best distribution of income. Presumably, we want to reward people for doing well, but how much of the GDP should the top 100 get, and the top 100 in what? (I'm not sure how many people can wiggle their ears fully independently, but it can't be all that many. Still, I make my living relying on my less fantastic software development skills rather than my fantastic ear-wiggling skills.)
Communism, as practiced in the Soviet Union, did not try to discourage people from excelling (except when posing a threat to Stalin). Average people in the Soviet Union didn't have the incentive to do their best that average people in the US do, but that didn't really apply to the top people. Soviet science and mathematics were first-rate. They dominated chess for decades. Their consumer technology lagged badly, and actual production was done by people who pretended to work because the enterprise pretended to pay them.
Lots of early rockets didn't really take off for some iterations. We're better now, but Musk was still thinking the Falcon Heavy could explode on or near the pad.
The big problem with launching stuff to LEO is the price. SpaceX is reducing that dramatically. It's doing that partly by recovering first stages and boosters in easily reusable form.
Why don't you name someone accomplishing great things, so I can point to something decades in the past that is sorta similar.
They do. There's no such thing as perfect security. There's got to be flaws somewhere.
What the Secure Enclave mostly does is ensure that the PIN/password can't be brute-forced, and keep the AES-256 key where it can't normally be extracted. This is a massive improvement over the 5C or earlier, but it seems unlikely to me that there's no point of attack. If you're not worried about putting anything back, you can try to figure out things at the hardware level. It won't be easy, and I don't know how practical it is.
An iPhone is in a state much like DRM: the AES-256 key has to be in the phone somehow for it to be useful.
We haven't outsourced civil rights. LEOs would have to send the phones to the company, and that's going to be pretty obvious if done without a warrant.
"Yes, Your Honor, the iPhone accidentally found itself in a shipment to Israel, and somebody, not us, must have paid the company, because imagine our surprise when we found...." To use for that purpose, the LEOs would have to have some sort of method to just take a phone and crack it, not send it to an Israeli company.
Parallel construction is used when they can covertly get information by illegitimate means. This isn't covert.