It's easier to govern countries that are basically monocultures. Socialism works better when the average citizen fits in the same square hole as the next. The US is not like that. The irony is that it's usually western europeans who dump on americans for being 'intolerant' of 'diversity' when said europeans have never lived it.
Hey, you know? We're all supposed to be equal before the law, and have access to equal opportunity. Embedding bias into the law, culture, education, and the media does not help this goal. Judging people on relevant discriminators is what's needed, while granting privilege based on the very attributes I'm told aren't supposed to matter is not.
The hypocrisy of feminism and so-called 'affirmative action' is once again in full sunlight for all to see. Nice to know that google is funding the use of relevant discriminators to decide who is worthy for khan's program. Oh, wait..
Please, don't bother replying with the whole 'check your privilege' thing, because it's women (and the other protected castes) who have the privilege today. This is because left wing doctrine insists on a default assumption that one group as a whole is oppressed and the other, the oppressor, based solely on the attribute(s) that isn't/aren't supposed to matter. The proof for 'patriarchy', today, requires diving into some nutty math (like that 77% on the dollar myth) and conspiracy theory, but the proof for 'matriarchy' (enforced by male as well as female feminist politicians), is in the law, on university campuses, and in the media.
If we want a society that operates on equal opportunity, we need law that doesn't compel private organizations to discriminate (in selecting for or against) on supposedly irrelevant attributes.
I would also say that everyone has limits. Backing individuals into impossible situations passive aggressively is something that modern society has become very good at. Since some people have more control than others for a given type of situation, those with less end up as canaries in the coal mine. Eg, the rise in school shootings probably has to do with how our society/school system increasingly treats individuality negatively. Those who feel it most, feel it first. Boom.
While you should get all available patches installed, it's not absolutely critical that you receive new updates, because, by now, you should be operating under the assumption that your machines are compromised, or at least compromisable. The last decade of patch tuesdays proves this. Unfortunately, most corporate policies revolve around these treadmills out of vendor-driven misguided fear of potential liability suits. The reality is that windows 8 will eventually have the same long list of patch tuesdays xp has.
The best way to secure your systems is to deny your employees access to the net. If your company does devwork, then put the programmers on their own subnet separate from the rest of the corporate network, and give them their own route to the net. The secretary doesn't need to browse facebook on her desktop.
It would be nice if they moved it to public domain and released source. However, I think limiting copyright would be good enough. Then they'd have to offer something better than free xp if they want more money. This upgrade treadmill the software industry has everyone on motivates them to do exactly nothing beneficial to the users giving them money.
Um.. no. It's the gay employees calling for him to be ousted for not supporting politics favoring their lifestyle. Would you support him ousting gay employees because of his beliefs? Of course not.
No, google designed the userland for that.. It's setup basically to ensure that app developers get real data from the phone. the owner of the phone wasn't meant to be secure. A real secure solution would be to ensure the apps have no idea if they're getting real info or not Right now the user just gets a choice to 'accept access or don't run'.
The fact this runs on a linux kernel is irrelevant.
No thanks. I don't want to be responsible for intractable problems. Security is one of those. See, in this situation the programmers would be the ones canned over any security flaw, regardless whether it's due to programming or misuse by the customer.
Cleaning toilets is starting to sound like a great job these days. It sure beats cleaning up peoples digital toilets...err computers and networks.
The best way to be safe from the internet of things is not to have unneeded connectivity. Anything else is a risk.
Still better than the "we pretend to care about our customers, but really care about protecting our image from damage by legitimate complaints" non-committal corporate newspeak that most closed vendors respond with.
or, most of the people that are despairing are the ones smart enough to see the writing on the wall, while the happy people let their ignorance run everything right off the cliff.
I would just put all of that on the list of things that help the oppressive surveillance police state. If it was pure capitalism, facebook would not be legally protected from attacks by those who despise it. Oppressive corporates need strong centralized government in order to corner the market.
1. Since when are biometric security and facial recognition capabilities that help the current problems society is facing? If anything, they make things worse.
2. Again, another technology that is NOT helping the surveillance problem.. It's making it worse.
3. Ditto.
4. Interesting, but this has been done before.
5. More surveillance and advertising.. I guess this is good if you're a government agent or an advertiser, but it's not good for anyone else.
6. Ditto
7. Maybe. I'd trade btrfs for more privacy on the net. We have plenty of filesystems, and like you said, it'd still get done eventually.
8. Stock prices are only relevant to the wealthy.. For the rest of us, privacy is the more important issue.
9. Are you joking? In security no news can also mean that exploits exist and they're held for private use. Besides, facebook is already compromised by three letter government agencies.
10. SaaS being platform independent is about the only thing good about it...for users.
Right, but there's nothing connecting employment with mozilla to those issues. He hasn't even been employed long enough to do anything one way or the other.
Take what shit? He hasn't mistreated them. He hasn't even had the opportunity to do so yet. I guarantee that there are people you are working with right now that have made personal decisions that you would not agree with. That's not oppression.
or maybe those people need to grow spines and realize that work is not the same thing as a party, where they get to choose who they associate with. As long as he treats them no differently than other employees, the problem lies squarely with the complainers.
Slashdot Mirror
The definition gets fuzzy when those defining 'crime' get to change it arbitrarily.
It's easier to govern countries that are basically monocultures. Socialism works better when the average citizen fits in the same square hole as the next. The US is not like that. The irony is that it's usually western europeans who dump on americans for being 'intolerant' of 'diversity' when said europeans have never lived it.
or we could decriminalize drugs and let the users kill themselves quietly with their habit.. There would be no need for them to rob anyone.
I know you're joking, but that is exactly how twisted left wing ideology gets when it has festered too long.
Why are you using word as page layout software?
Hey, you know? We're all supposed to be equal before the law, and have access to equal opportunity. Embedding bias into the law, culture, education, and the media does not help this goal. Judging people on relevant discriminators is what's needed, while granting privilege based on the very attributes I'm told aren't supposed to matter is not.
The hypocrisy of feminism and so-called 'affirmative action' is once again in full sunlight for all to see. Nice to know that google is funding the use of relevant discriminators to decide who is worthy for khan's program. Oh, wait..
Please, don't bother replying with the whole 'check your privilege' thing, because it's women (and the other protected castes) who have the privilege today. This is because left wing doctrine insists on a default assumption that one group as a whole is oppressed and the other, the oppressor, based solely on the attribute(s) that isn't/aren't supposed to matter. The proof for 'patriarchy', today, requires diving into some nutty math (like that 77% on the dollar myth) and conspiracy theory, but the proof for 'matriarchy' (enforced by male as well as female feminist politicians), is in the law, on university campuses, and in the media.
If we want a society that operates on equal opportunity, we need law that doesn't compel private organizations to discriminate (in selecting for or against) on supposedly irrelevant attributes.
OMG you're such an intolerant bigot!!! The answer, comrade, is to make everyone deaf.. then we can all be aurally correct!!
Wipeout/XL/2097/3?
Torture an animal long enough and it will bite you. Humans are no different, we're just better at it.
I would also say that everyone has limits. Backing individuals into impossible situations passive aggressively is something that modern society has become very good at. Since some people have more control than others for a given type of situation, those with less end up as canaries in the coal mine. Eg, the rise in school shootings probably has to do with how our society/school system increasingly treats individuality negatively. Those who feel it most, feel it first. Boom.
While you should get all available patches installed, it's not absolutely critical that you receive new updates, because, by now, you should be operating under the assumption that your machines are compromised, or at least compromisable. The last decade of patch tuesdays proves this. Unfortunately, most corporate policies revolve around these treadmills out of vendor-driven misguided fear of potential liability suits. The reality is that windows 8 will eventually have the same long list of patch tuesdays xp has.
The best way to secure your systems is to deny your employees access to the net. If your company does devwork, then put the programmers on their own subnet separate from the rest of the corporate network, and give them their own route to the net. The secretary doesn't need to browse facebook on her desktop.
Hardware does die.. and if the host os is old enough, it won't run properly on new hardware..
It would be nice if they moved it to public domain and released source. However, I think limiting copyright would be good enough. Then they'd have to offer something better than free xp if they want more money. This upgrade treadmill the software industry has everyone on motivates them to do exactly nothing beneficial to the users giving them money.
Um.. no. It's the gay employees calling for him to be ousted for not supporting politics favoring their lifestyle. Would you support him ousting gay employees because of his beliefs? Of course not.
You think it over. They're just as bad as Eich.
No, google designed the userland for that.. It's setup basically to ensure that app developers get real data from the phone. the owner of the phone wasn't meant to be secure. A real secure solution would be to ensure the apps have no idea if they're getting real info or not Right now the user just gets a choice to 'accept access or don't run'.
The fact this runs on a linux kernel is irrelevant.
No thanks. I don't want to be responsible for intractable problems. Security is one of those. See, in this situation the programmers would be the ones canned over any security flaw, regardless whether it's due to programming or misuse by the customer.
Cleaning toilets is starting to sound like a great job these days. It sure beats cleaning up peoples digital toilets...err computers and networks.
The best way to be safe from the internet of things is not to have unneeded connectivity. Anything else is a risk.
Still better than the "we pretend to care about our customers, but really care about protecting our image from damage by legitimate complaints" non-committal corporate newspeak that most closed vendors respond with.
or, most of the people that are despairing are the ones smart enough to see the writing on the wall, while the happy people let their ignorance run everything right off the cliff.
I would just put all of that on the list of things that help the oppressive surveillance police state. If it was pure capitalism, facebook would not be legally protected from attacks by those who despise it. Oppressive corporates need strong centralized government in order to corner the market.
1. Since when are biometric security and facial recognition capabilities that help the current problems society is facing? If anything, they make things worse.
2. Again, another technology that is NOT helping the surveillance problem.. It's making it worse.
3. Ditto.
4. Interesting, but this has been done before.
5. More surveillance and advertising.. I guess this is good if you're a government agent or an advertiser, but it's not good for anyone else.
6. Ditto
7. Maybe. I'd trade btrfs for more privacy on the net. We have plenty of filesystems, and like you said, it'd still get done eventually.
8. Stock prices are only relevant to the wealthy.. For the rest of us, privacy is the more important issue.
9. Are you joking? In security no news can also mean that exploits exist and they're held for private use. Besides, facebook is already compromised by three letter government agencies.
10. SaaS being platform independent is about the only thing good about it...for users.
Right, but there's nothing connecting employment with mozilla to those issues. He hasn't even been employed long enough to do anything one way or the other.
and if he 'asked' them to step down because they're gay, what would the response be?
Take what shit? He hasn't mistreated them. He hasn't even had the opportunity to do so yet. I guarantee that there are people you are working with right now that have made personal decisions that you would not agree with. That's not oppression.
or maybe those people need to grow spines and realize that work is not the same thing as a party, where they get to choose who they associate with. As long as he treats them no differently than other employees, the problem lies squarely with the complainers.