Mainly because if the government can break into your phone, then other people can.
You wouldn't accept if the government required no locks on doors, and this is basically what they are asking, but with phones.
If you own a blog, or any other place where users can put comments, then it will get tons of comment spam, from bots trying to improve page-rank. It makes it difficult to run a comment section of a website (the other difficult problem being people).
What, exactly, do you think Microsoft is doing? They aren't open-sourcing this stuff because they like you.....it's guaranteed they have some plot to make money.
I'd wish I could go back in time and tell your 1990s self that things would get better in the web dev world. But they haven't, it still sucks, and you still get no respect.
Yeah, and Dreamweaver is still a thing, but the WYSIWYG isn't that great.....but yeah, front-end developer could probably go away now if we really wanted to. Put our money into a design team instead.
Hmmmm, yeah. That's tough, making hover states. Now that you mention it, that complexity is so high, AI will never figure it out. Web front-end developer's jobs are safe. No need to learn another language.
If you are worried about AI replacing you, you must be doing something very routine, not requiring anything new or creative.
That very often describes web programmers. A designer designs a website in Photoshop, then hands off the elements to the programmer to be implemented in CSS/HTML. There is no reason that couldn't happen automatically.
Adding API calls and dynamic elements makes it somewhat harder, but still....
It builds on the ideas set forth in Simians, Cyborgs, and Women. It's a social science paper, not a climate science paper, so that's why there's some confusion.
This theme about MS being "Open Source Happy" is dubious at best (no surprise it comes via timothy)
Let's say it differently.....they're definitely trying to integrate themselves into the open source community.......
Which is not to say they are friendly to open source.
Well, I've read that there is stuff that was classified, and that she should have known was classified at the time, but tbh it's not a topic I care enough about to research deeply into to be sure.
One interesting aspect of the case: it shows that working for the government can be dangerous. If she had been working for a private company, at worst she would have been fired (maybe sued). But working for the government, suddenly the full weight of the law can fall on you like a ton of bricks.
Yeap (and that has nothing to do with being 'liberal' or 'conservative,' it's just plain unreliable). I was reticent to post it, but it had copies of the actual emails in the article, so you can ignore the text and focus on the emails themselves.
Anyway, certain communications are classified by default, and apparently those showed up in her emails too.
Anyway, the cleanest way to deal with it would be to wait until after she wins/loses the election to indict her, so it doesn't put too much influence on the election (and she can pardon herself anyway if she wins).
Previously, they hitched that all on the premise that a target market adopts Windows as the leverage point to get in. Now they are (seemingly) accepting that many market segments won't go that way (server and mobile particularly) and trying to tap into those markets.
A lot has changed, Windows is a small part of Microsoft's revenue, and the cloud is now the biggest part. CEO Nadella sees the cloud as a huge cash cow, and wants a part of (seriously, read the article).
So they probably have complaints like, ".net sucks because you can only develop for it on Windows." I'm sure they've heard it, because I've heard it. So they are trying to remove all barriers any pesky developers might tell their managers, preventing them from using the technology (as you pointed out).
Since it's rather hard to prove he was ultimately damaging the image for the organization who owns the rights to Batman and associated representation,
That is an argument that you'd make for a fair-use defense. This was a ruling on whether the car was copyrightable.
And apparently it is copyrightable, which isn't surprising since even a squiggle on a paper is copyrightable.
So now he can try raising a fair-use defense (unless he's already done so, the article doesn't mention).
here was something fundamentally wrong with Google+, and that's why it didn't take off as Google had hoped. But is that really the case
Yeah. Google+ was created with a different goal. It was at a time when Facebook was getting a lot of advertising based on "knowing the user," all their likes, etc; and Google only had search terms.
In practical terms, advertisers mainly want age and gender (because that's what they're used to working with on TV). So Google introduced G+ and grabbed everyone's real name and birthday, which gives a 'good enough' gender approximation.
Slashdot Mirror
Mainly because if the government can break into your phone, then other people can.
You wouldn't accept if the government required no locks on doors, and this is basically what they are asking, but with phones.
Well, with Go, it's more like two weird tricks. That Monte Carlo algorithm they used is kind of weird, I wouldn't have expected it to work.
Both of them are hard......unless you know the trick. If you only know the trick to one of them, then the other one is harder.
They might not have realized what was going to happen.
If you own a blog, or any other place where users can put comments, then it will get tons of comment spam, from bots trying to improve page-rank. It makes it difficult to run a comment section of a website (the other difficult problem being people).
I wish this meme would die.
What, exactly, do you think Microsoft is doing? They aren't open-sourcing this stuff because they like you.....it's guaranteed they have some plot to make money.
Seems that way. We're so jammed with 'stuff' that if a page doesn't have much going on, it looks kind of barren.
Inflation: the first thing to be ignored by people who want to deceive you
Wow. Here we pay an exact bill every month.
Things have gotten better but I never stayed in web dev after my six-month internship.
Nope. Check out CSS Flexbox. We're still laying things out with tables, but now we have more layers of cruft inbetween.
I'd wish I could go back in time and tell your 1990s self that things would get better in the web dev world. But they haven't, it still sucks, and you still get no respect.
lol I love that the first chapter there is called "Hello iTunes."
tbh I think websites have gotten dumber in the last five years, so we're kind of regressing.
nope lol, can't remember where I read it. Maybe I'm wrong.
Yeah, and Dreamweaver is still a thing, but the WYSIWYG isn't that great.....but yeah, front-end developer could probably go away now if we really wanted to. Put our money into a design team instead.
Hmmmm, yeah. That's tough, making hover states. Now that you mention it, that complexity is so high, AI will never figure it out. Web front-end developer's jobs are safe. No need to learn another language.
If you are worried about AI replacing you, you must be doing something very routine, not requiring anything new or creative.
That very often describes web programmers. A designer designs a website in Photoshop, then hands off the elements to the programmer to be implemented in CSS/HTML. There is no reason that couldn't happen automatically.
Adding API calls and dynamic elements makes it somewhat harder, but still....
Positive: I'll probably get returned a shit-load of money on my energy bill advances this year.
You have to pay your energy bill a year in advance??
It builds on the ideas set forth in Simians, Cyborgs, and Women. It's a social science paper, not a climate science paper, so that's why there's some confusion.
This theme about MS being "Open Source Happy" is dubious at best (no surprise it comes via timothy)
Let's say it differently.....they're definitely trying to integrate themselves into the open source community.......
Which is not to say they are friendly to open source.
Well, I've read that there is stuff that was classified, and that she should have known was classified at the time, but tbh it's not a topic I care enough about to research deeply into to be sure.
One interesting aspect of the case: it shows that working for the government can be dangerous. If she had been working for a private company, at worst she would have been fired (maybe sued). But working for the government, suddenly the full weight of the law can fall on you like a ton of bricks.
Dailymail has not proven to be a reliable source.
Yeap (and that has nothing to do with being 'liberal' or 'conservative,' it's just plain unreliable). I was reticent to post it, but it had copies of the actual emails in the article, so you can ignore the text and focus on the emails themselves.
Anyway, certain communications are classified by default, and apparently those showed up in her emails too.
Anyway, the cleanest way to deal with it would be to wait until after she wins/loses the election to indict her, so it doesn't put too much influence on the election (and she can pardon herself anyway if she wins).
Previously, they hitched that all on the premise that a target market adopts Windows as the leverage point to get in. Now they are (seemingly) accepting that many market segments won't go that way (server and mobile particularly) and trying to tap into those markets.
A lot has changed, Windows is a small part of Microsoft's revenue, and the cloud is now the biggest part. CEO Nadella sees the cloud as a huge cash cow, and wants a part of (seriously, read the article).
So they probably have complaints like, ".net sucks because you can only develop for it on Windows." I'm sure they've heard it, because I've heard it. So they are trying to remove all barriers any pesky developers might tell their managers, preventing them from using the technology (as you pointed out).
Since it's rather hard to prove he was ultimately damaging the image for the organization who owns the rights to Batman and associated representation,
That is an argument that you'd make for a fair-use defense. This was a ruling on whether the car was copyrightable. And apparently it is copyrightable, which isn't surprising since even a squiggle on a paper is copyrightable.
So now he can try raising a fair-use defense (unless he's already done so, the article doesn't mention).
The answer to 2 and 3 are "yes" and "yes." For example, this.
here was something fundamentally wrong with Google+, and that's why it didn't take off as Google had hoped. But is that really the case
Yeah. Google+ was created with a different goal. It was at a time when Facebook was getting a lot of advertising based on "knowing the user," all their likes, etc; and Google only had search terms.
In practical terms, advertisers mainly want age and gender (because that's what they're used to working with on TV). So Google introduced G+ and grabbed everyone's real name and birthday, which gives a 'good enough' gender approximation.