"Unless you're dealing with a market segment dominated by Linux-incompatible chipsets, such as the detachable laptop/tablet market."
Those niches exist but you chose a poor example. Android = Linux... it is the dominate platform in that market. I have two tablets, one a detachable ASUS that was the best performing detachable available running any platform when I bought it sitting in my living room right now The same model could be purchased with Microsoft's option but that offers poor app support and slower performance on the same hardware.
It sounds like you might be annoyed by MS failed attempt at such a device that subsequently was sold at a substantial loss just to create the illusion of sales and dump inventory. You had problems wiping it and installing a worthwhile system on it. The fact you assumed you could and can point out specific examples where it didn't work is only highlighting a feature of linux. It is highly portable and works across such a wide range of hardware that you can just go around wiping out the software for devices and replacing it with Linux it even works so well it is noteworthy when this warranty voiding not planned or supported by the device manufacturer activity fails. Number of places you can wipe a device not intended to run windows or macos and install one of those systems on them... essentially none with the possible exception of a whitebox pc with compatible specs.
There is that pesky problem of you being below the plane and the cockpit and viewing window being on the top half. It's really hard to shine something in someone's eyes when you are effectively at a 90 degree angle below them and they are looking forward.
It would probably be easier to combine a bunch of lasers together and cut the steel to make the pilots drop out the floor.
Let's be honest here, these are mostly private pilots who are annoyed they paid so damn much money to get their license and plane and now are having peaceful wealthy elite sky views disrupted by plebs zipping their annoying laser lights around on the clouds. Nobody is actually being harmed here.
I consider a laser strike to be a laser weapon being used to shoot down a plane. If they are calling people pointing at constellations who can't even see the planes at night "laser strikes" they should be prepared to be laughed into we don't care mode by pretty much everyone. It isn't like these are attacks.
"are just not intelligent enough to understand the risks and the sentences they are facing"
On the contrary, they are intelligent enough to understand that regardless of what the penalty or sentence they face pretty much no risk. It isn't as if the guy in the jet knows the address of the tiny spec below that fired a laser up at him.
If anything this is probably the jet equivalent of road rage, people who are sick and tired of the damn aircraft noise polluting their environment.
"If that's true, then why aren't game developers focusing on OpenGL instead of DirectX then?"
Because they already know direct x and probably don't know opengl. Because direct x is what is primarily targeted and optimized by graphics card drivers with opengl a secondary consideration. And lastly because sound is then organized into the same library whereas with opengl they would then need to pick a secondary sound library.
OpenGL is an api, it has no performance characteristics, those all come down to the implementation.
"Are you saying that every developer in the industry is in a mass conspiracy with Microsoft"
No conspiracy needed. Microsoft has no interest in opengl performing well on windows therefore they don't expend any effort to make it perform well and thereby cripple it relative to their own library. Manufacturers target Direct X because game developers do, game developers target Direct X because manufacturers do.
In almost every case the "ridiculous big conspiracy" argument is a false dichotomy, you don't need active conspiracy for individuals industry wide to create the same result active conspiracy and collusion would. In most places this occurs out of lots of individuals working out of self interest. The same is true of widescale consumer screwing in industry, if all the major competitors engage in the same practice the consumer can't vote with their dollar, the major competitors don't actually need to agree though. The same things are profitable for all of them, if they all pursue what is most profitable for themselves the result will be all of them engaging in the same practice and screwing the consumer.
OpenGL and Linux actually rival or beat windows + directx in terms of raw capability. The only real advantages of directx are the wide user base and the integration of sound into the same stack. Hopefully valve keeps pushing in this direction and we'll see improved drivers and more games targeting directx.
Back in the day World of Warcraft was originally intended to be cross platform so the game was developed with both libraries in mind. They yanked the linux support just before release but when codeweaver started producing winex they very quickly added wow support. You could switch to opengl mode on either windows or linux. Linux definitely outperformed windows in opengl mode indicating the superior performance of the OS itself. Then the issue became directx being the primary focus for wow development and video card development which made opengl performance lag behind the OS.
" If I break into your house and discover evidence that you've been transporting underage ferrets across state lines for immoral purposes, that's admissible evidence."
It shouldn't be. In a world where I can work at Company X and discovering they are putting carcinogens to the water supply a midwestern town and the documents I smuggle out are inadmissable on the grounds they are "stolen company documents" the police shouldn't be able to use evidence that wasn't obtained in a way they couldn't have obtained it themselves legally, even if it wasn't at their request.
Which isn't to say I don't think the burglers testimony wouldn't be valid grounds to then get a warrant to search for evidence of said ferret trade that could be admitted. If he was asked by police to break in, then what he sees shouldn't even be considered for the purpose of getting a warrant.
The defendants are innocent until proven guilty. The defendants have rights. Those rights have been violated. Whether or not they happened to have actually committed a crime is another matter. Whether or not the alleged crimes should be crimes is also another matter.
The reality is that everyone breaks the law every day. You probably broke half a dozen laws you don't even know exist today. It is actually more important that law enforcement fail to enforce the law 99.999% of the time due to limitations placed on them than it is to catch "the bad guys." Those limitations are the only way our society can function to some degree while the legal system is broken with courts illegally lying to juries about their right to judge the law. Until jurors are properly informed of their right to nullify unjust laws or to nullify laws on a case by case basis where their application would not result in justice, limiting law enforcement is the best we have. At least then people who can at least operate in society without disrupting it to the extent it becomes viable and worthwhile for law enforcement with their limitations to arrest them are not arrested and that is the only reason almost everyone reading this is not in jail.
It's already so bad that if you ever do get arrested for any of the dozens of things we all do on a daily basis without even realizing they are illegal or could be illegal at officer discretion you are effectively unemployable for the rest of your life. Or at least your education is now worthless and your professional career over, relegating you to work in the lowest paid stratum of society.
People who break the law are everywhere. People who break drug laws are at least 30% of the people you interact with on a daily basis. People who actually need to be taken off the streets are uncommon and there are more of them in suits and uniforms than peddling drugs.
"Courts don't exclude evidence obtained from an illegal search in order to protect defendants. They do it to protect everyone else."
The defendants are part of everyone else until they are convicted and even then being convicted doesn't mean you are actually guilty and even then being guilty of a crime doesn't mean you've actually done anything wrong. Do not equate defendants with bad guys who don't need protected, they are those of who are currently under fire and in need of our immediate protection. And if you are on a jury remember that courts never determined the people didn't reserve the right to nullify the law in the Constitution, they only determined they don't have to tell you about it and later that they can legally lie to jurors about it and aren't blocked from excusing jurors or declaring a mistrial if they find out the jurors know about it. As a juror "not guilty" doesn't mean (s)he didn't do it. Not guilty means I don't believe this defendant, my neighbor, needs to be locked in a cage, raped, and denied meaningful pursuit of employment for life based on what the prosecution has proven beyond the slightest reasonable doubt.
Sure but this isn't just about making the FBI play nice and stop cheating. This is about a bunch of defendants at risk of being convicted on evidence that should not be admissible without a warrant or that was only subsequently obtainable because of the information illegally obtained without a warrant and therefore also should not be admissible.
" If you're going to install software on computers you don't own in order to capture information, you need a warrant."
Like seizing Tormail and using it to install malware in Tor users browsers? I agree, the FBI should be putting some of their own in federal prison for these crimes the same as anyone else would be. If anything police should be punished more severely for breaking the law than anyone else. Anyone they hire should have the same limitations imposed and any information gathered from third parties should be restricted in the same manner with respect to violations of civil and constitutional rights as if the police had gathered in the manner those third parties did.
In the case of data traversing the network it comes down to whether or not the network was functioning as private or public infrastructure. There is a very simple way to figure that out. Sue them for copyright infringement and if they claim they fall under the safe harbor provision they were acting as public infrastructure and a warrant is required for admissibility. You can't both claim to be legally blameless for the data I sent over your network and claim you own it and therefore I have no expectation of privacy with regard to it at the same time.
It's pretty serious news if "consultants" are allowed to violate rights of citizens that law enforcement themselves are not.
The restrictions on law enforcement should carry over to anyone working with them and the admissibility of anything found that way in court should be the same as if the FBI had carried out those actions themselves..
Those aren't CEOs those are people who founded and own their company and might happen to keep a CEO title. They can't even be fired they would have to fire themselves (though Gates did). That is an entirely different game than your typical scenario where the original people are outed in by the venture capital firm that ends up owning the company or what comes later when the board hires some Harvard blueblood MBA CEO.
Probably doesn't hurt to point out that while successful at making money, they are also generally terrible people for their industries. Gates and Ellison set back technology for at least 20 years (we are still running inferior tech because of their business success). Packard notoriously produced some of the worst technology in the sector with technicians dreading seeing one of the products produced under him and heart broken consumers discovering they'd bought the machine you couldn't upgrade. Jobs booted the actual brains behind the technology and ran Apple from producing advanced systems that rivaled the Amiga into being overpriced commodity crap that came in fancy packages and lots of color choices. Woz might have been lousy at business but he was the brains behind everything worthwhile at Apple.
Numbers don't prove that products aren't shitty, they prove they are popular which has very little relation to function. In tech and really STEM as a whole function is the only factor in whether or not something is shitty. It is common to see the best solution go under. Commodore produced far superior products to IBM and Apple but they went under. Convincing idiots your inferior product is trendy and cool will get you the numbers but doesn't make it even the slightest bit more or less shitty.
People would be much better off without Bill Gates and Steve Jobs deluding them into thinking they shouldn't be paying qualified engineers to both choose their technology and manage it for them. Just because wire is relatively simple to run and an outlet is easy to wire up does not mean you aren't an idiot if you are doing it yourself rather than hiring an electrician and neither does everything turning out fine 99 times out of a hundred when you do. Eventually that under spec'd wire you chose, that 10a outlet connected to a 20a breaker, that aluminum junction you used to splice it, or the location you ran it being a fire hazard in the attic is going to burn someone.
"Next week prices will be adjusted so you now need 1200$/week as a minimum."
That isn't accurate. Prices haven't gone up in Europe and China, etc where our goods and services come from. If anything they go down because employers no longer need to be concerned about the minimum wage and many of the homeless can now return to functioning roles in society.
Additionally, prices go up as a result of inflation but there is no net increase in the amount of money floating around just in who has it. Well there is more money but there is always more money, this does not increase the rate at which we create new money.
The federal reserve is constantly creating billions in new currency, they don't print new money, but they create new money digitally and they buy the money the treasury prints at the cost of printing not face value. They then loan this out to banks at interest that is so low it is virtually zero (especially when you consider that impact of inflation by the time they've paid it back). In fact, banks often turn around and buy treasury bills with that money turning it in to national debt but usually greed kicks in and they instead invest in the private sector where they get higher interest and it stimulates the economy. Banks can turn around and include this in their holdings on the next round and borrow yet more against it from the federal reserve. The economic theory behind all this is that a certain low amount of inflation means that the value of money will go down over time pressuring people to invest it, use it, and otherwise build new wealth if they are to break even let alone gain which keeps the economy moving. The federal reserve controls the tap for this new money by adjusting the federal interest rate.
So, a portion of the new money would then be diverted from profit generating handouts to banks to go directly to citizens. It's actually a small amount compared to what the federal reserve hands out to banks in loans. Any increase in inflation can fixed by increasing the federal interest rate which is currently is at an all time low. Since there isn't more money floating around, prices actually will not go up. Actually this would head off a currently inevitable doubling of the minimum wage which would increase labor costs and would definitely increase prices. Instead consumers will simply have more disposable income and be able to afford more goods and services while employers will have a reduced minimum labor expenditure allowing them to in some part reduce prices while increasing retail profits.
The $32k/yr per person this provides is pretty minimal here so most of us will be keeping our day job. But many may choose to go abroad and live where costs are lower. That works out just fine, they will reduce the local burden to produce supplies and services.
What job? Golf? Lunch with other executives? The CEO is a few executive levels away from being someone who does anything other than ask their minions for their problems and then turn around and ask them to provide the solution which they in turn rubber stamp. You could chop all these and have the last group form a council and eliminate the executive level entirely.
Of course shareholders don't like this. People who actually do something at an organization tend to want to actually focus on improving the organization and its operations and shareholders want you to make the bad decisions that will result in a better earnings report this quarter and to hell with the next ten years.
Replace the minimum wage with a minimum income of $15/hr for every man/woman/child in the US with no requirements or limitations save citizenship.
Pay it straight from inflation and adjust fed rates accordingly so new money is slightly more expensive for banks and no actual increase in the inflation rate occurs.
Increase as we are able. We are the wealthiest nation in the world, let's automate the crap out of our work, outsource the rest, and establish a model for the rest of the world to follow when it catches up.
Industry collusion can largely negate realistic options. There is no reason services like netflix can't exist while preserving privacy (security is an illusion and therefore false by definition). But there is profit in stealing our data and therefore the industry creates an artificial dichotomy, choose between no/inferior service and your private data being stolen and sold by vendors.
"LG used a firmware update for its smart televisions to link the "smart" features of the device to viewer tracking and monitoring. Viewers who applied the update, but refused to consent to monitoring were not able to use services like Netflix and YouTube."
Consumers who opt-in and/or are opted in to data collection should have to be paid a mandatory non-transferable or waivable 50% commission on all sales of data and advertising revenues for which it is used or face fines which are at a minimum treble damages (paid back to consumers) without regard for damage to business model viability, bankruptcy, or allowance of settlements below the minimum and criminals penalties for negligent failure to prosecute.
Going to steal my data? If I can't stop you then you should at least have to split the proceeds 50/50 and be denied all manner of ways to pressure me into giving up my cut.
Something that deceptive is illegal on a television ad. Why is it a deception free-for-all in Vizio configuration menus or bills in congress for that matter.
This crap needs fixed. And frankly the privacy notices, terms and conditions, and end user license agreements should all be void if longer than 50 words in common English. Anything written for attorneys-by-attorneys does not constitute a meeting of minds when presented as an agreement for the purchase and use of a consumer good and/or service including a web based one and we all damn well know it.
There are too many such goods and services per consumer and too many consumers per good and/or service for hiring an attorney to review such agreements to be considered a reasonable burden or even to expect consumers to read them themselves at their current lengths. Additionally, allowing such long and complicated agreements allows for burying anti-consumer terms so complicated that they can't reasonably be used as a point of competition and instead become industry practice creating the same anti-consumer result as collusion or a monopoly.
"It may even arguably be a good thing by only serving you ads for things you might be interested in."
My personal data is my property. It's my right to decide who may have it, how valuable it is, and under what terms if any I will part with it. Seeing ads I might be interested in when I'm not even seeking to buy something is nowhere near as valuable as my privacy. Not even in the same ballpark. I'd be willing to bleed on a battlefield to protect the right to privacy and personal data.
The money isn't even going to me for my data, these companies are stealing what doesn't belong to them and selling it.
Slashdot was actually hiding some of the conversation.
But the current non-destructive method still isn't transcription regardless of what the GP said. It is a phone + app to take pictures, then apply a few tools to ocr and combine the text into your choice of digital file. This basically just puts the camera on a stand, provides a footpedal, and automates the toolchain to perform the same process. Not really a huge speedup.
Honestly though, most pirated books come from simply cracking the encryption on the popular formats from B&N and Amazon. Which gives much higher quality, eliminates OCR errors, and preserves the books digital structure, TOC, etc. You can then enjoy all the advantages including having you place sync'd between devices and so forth. There are dumps of every kindle book on Amazon.com periodically.
Not to say publishers won't attack this non-nonsensically but this is how people pirated books in the 90's not so much today. This really is only useful for people who want to legitimately back up and enjoy their own personal books.
"The announcement is a blow to privacy advocates who had petitioned the agency for stronger Internet privacy rules. But it's a win for many Silicon Valley companies whose business models rely on monetizing Internet users' personal data."
In other words, it is a loss for people. Last I checked the entire purpose of the FCC was to protect people from large corporate entities. Clearly laying down on the job today.
Under the law they should in fact be judged by a combination of the two. The absolute judgement by action ignoring mitigating intent is not an old man thing, it is the new thing. There is a reason murder charges come in multiple degrees.
Ironically, it was largely members of the KKK being set free for hate crimes in the racist south that was used as the excuse for a massive power grab by the judicial and justification for lying to juries about their right to nullify the law where it's application was not just. For example, a judge will instruct jurors that they can not judge the law and therefore could not find you not guilty of assault charges in an instance where you tackled a man who mugging an elderly woman. The Constitution on the other hand empowers juries to do exactly that. Along with other little things like refusing to prosecute people who protest against the government or violated the "Snitch on your Neighbor Child Safety through Bread Tax and Exemptions to Unauthorized Systems Access Penalties for Copyright Cartels Puppy Love Act".
Do what is right and the hell with the law. Then face a jury of your peers who are actually informed of their right to nullify and face their judgement. They have every right to both be opposed to hacking systems and feel your actions in this case were the lesser of two evils. Their decisions are one off and set no precedent.
Slashdot Mirror
"Unless you're dealing with a market segment dominated by Linux-incompatible chipsets, such as the detachable laptop/tablet market."
Those niches exist but you chose a poor example. Android = Linux... it is the dominate platform in that market. I have two tablets, one a detachable ASUS that was the best performing detachable available running any platform when I bought it sitting in my living room right now The same model could be purchased with Microsoft's option but that offers poor app support and slower performance on the same hardware.
It sounds like you might be annoyed by MS failed attempt at such a device that subsequently was sold at a substantial loss just to create the illusion of sales and dump inventory. You had problems wiping it and installing a worthwhile system on it. The fact you assumed you could and can point out specific examples where it didn't work is only highlighting a feature of linux. It is highly portable and works across such a wide range of hardware that you can just go around wiping out the software for devices and replacing it with Linux it even works so well it is noteworthy when this warranty voiding not planned or supported by the device manufacturer activity fails. Number of places you can wipe a device not intended to run windows or macos and install one of those systems on them... essentially none with the possible exception of a whitebox pc with compatible specs.
There is that pesky problem of you being below the plane and the cockpit and viewing window being on the top half. It's really hard to shine something in someone's eyes when you are effectively at a 90 degree angle below them and they are looking forward.
It would probably be easier to combine a bunch of lasers together and cut the steel to make the pilots drop out the floor.
Let's be honest here, these are mostly private pilots who are annoyed they paid so damn much money to get their license and plane and now are having peaceful wealthy elite sky views disrupted by plebs zipping their annoying laser lights around on the clouds. Nobody is actually being harmed here.
I consider a laser strike to be a laser weapon being used to shoot down a plane. If they are calling people pointing at constellations who can't even see the planes at night "laser strikes" they should be prepared to be laughed into we don't care mode by pretty much everyone. It isn't like these are attacks.
"are just not intelligent enough to understand the risks and the sentences they are facing"
On the contrary, they are intelligent enough to understand that regardless of what the penalty or sentence they face pretty much no risk. It isn't as if the guy in the jet knows the address of the tiny spec below that fired a laser up at him.
If anything this is probably the jet equivalent of road rage, people who are sick and tired of the damn aircraft noise polluting their environment.
"If that's true, then why aren't game developers focusing on OpenGL instead of DirectX then?"
Because they already know direct x and probably don't know opengl. Because direct x is what is primarily targeted and optimized by graphics card drivers with opengl a secondary consideration. And lastly because sound is then organized into the same library whereas with opengl they would then need to pick a secondary sound library.
OpenGL is an api, it has no performance characteristics, those all come down to the implementation.
"Are you saying that every developer in the industry is in a mass conspiracy with Microsoft"
No conspiracy needed. Microsoft has no interest in opengl performing well on windows therefore they don't expend any effort to make it perform well and thereby cripple it relative to their own library. Manufacturers target Direct X because game developers do, game developers target Direct X because manufacturers do.
In almost every case the "ridiculous big conspiracy" argument is a false dichotomy, you don't need active conspiracy for individuals industry wide to create the same result active conspiracy and collusion would. In most places this occurs out of lots of individuals working out of self interest. The same is true of widescale consumer screwing in industry, if all the major competitors engage in the same practice the consumer can't vote with their dollar, the major competitors don't actually need to agree though. The same things are profitable for all of them, if they all pursue what is most profitable for themselves the result will be all of them engaging in the same practice and screwing the consumer.
Only if you are a pc gamer... which is actually a pretty tiny segment these days. Most people have gone console for gaming.
In essentially every other area windows offers the relatively painful experience.
OpenGL and Linux actually rival or beat windows + directx in terms of raw capability. The only real advantages of directx are the wide user base and the integration of sound into the same stack. Hopefully valve keeps pushing in this direction and we'll see improved drivers and more games targeting directx.
Back in the day World of Warcraft was originally intended to be cross platform so the game was developed with both libraries in mind. They yanked the linux support just before release but when codeweaver started producing winex they very quickly added wow support. You could switch to opengl mode on either windows or linux. Linux definitely outperformed windows in opengl mode indicating the superior performance of the OS itself. Then the issue became directx being the primary focus for wow development and video card development which made opengl performance lag behind the OS.
" If I break into your house and discover evidence that you've been transporting underage ferrets across state lines for immoral purposes, that's admissible evidence."
It shouldn't be. In a world where I can work at Company X and discovering they are putting carcinogens to the water supply a midwestern town and the documents I smuggle out are inadmissable on the grounds they are "stolen company documents" the police shouldn't be able to use evidence that wasn't obtained in a way they couldn't have obtained it themselves legally, even if it wasn't at their request.
Which isn't to say I don't think the burglers testimony wouldn't be valid grounds to then get a warrant to search for evidence of said ferret trade that could be admitted. If he was asked by police to break in, then what he sees shouldn't even be considered for the purpose of getting a warrant.
The defendants are innocent until proven guilty. The defendants have rights. Those rights have been violated. Whether or not they happened to have actually committed a crime is another matter. Whether or not the alleged crimes should be crimes is also another matter.
The reality is that everyone breaks the law every day. You probably broke half a dozen laws you don't even know exist today. It is actually more important that law enforcement fail to enforce the law 99.999% of the time due to limitations placed on them than it is to catch "the bad guys." Those limitations are the only way our society can function to some degree while the legal system is broken with courts illegally lying to juries about their right to judge the law. Until jurors are properly informed of their right to nullify unjust laws or to nullify laws on a case by case basis where their application would not result in justice, limiting law enforcement is the best we have. At least then people who can at least operate in society without disrupting it to the extent it becomes viable and worthwhile for law enforcement with their limitations to arrest them are not arrested and that is the only reason almost everyone reading this is not in jail.
It's already so bad that if you ever do get arrested for any of the dozens of things we all do on a daily basis without even realizing they are illegal or could be illegal at officer discretion you are effectively unemployable for the rest of your life. Or at least your education is now worthless and your professional career over, relegating you to work in the lowest paid stratum of society.
People who break the law are everywhere. People who break drug laws are at least 30% of the people you interact with on a daily basis. People who actually need to be taken off the streets are uncommon and there are more of them in suits and uniforms than peddling drugs.
"Courts don't exclude evidence obtained from an illegal search in order to protect defendants. They do it to protect everyone else."
The defendants are part of everyone else until they are convicted and even then being convicted doesn't mean you are actually guilty and even then being guilty of a crime doesn't mean you've actually done anything wrong. Do not equate defendants with bad guys who don't need protected, they are those of who are currently under fire and in need of our immediate protection. And if you are on a jury remember that courts never determined the people didn't reserve the right to nullify the law in the Constitution, they only determined they don't have to tell you about it and later that they can legally lie to jurors about it and aren't blocked from excusing jurors or declaring a mistrial if they find out the jurors know about it. As a juror "not guilty" doesn't mean (s)he didn't do it. Not guilty means I don't believe this defendant, my neighbor, needs to be locked in a cage, raped, and denied meaningful pursuit of employment for life based on what the prosecution has proven beyond the slightest reasonable doubt.
Sure but this isn't just about making the FBI play nice and stop cheating. This is about a bunch of defendants at risk of being convicted on evidence that should not be admissible without a warrant or that was only subsequently obtainable because of the information illegally obtained without a warrant and therefore also should not be admissible.
" If you're going to install software on computers you don't own in order to capture information, you need a warrant."
Like seizing Tormail and using it to install malware in Tor users browsers? I agree, the FBI should be putting some of their own in federal prison for these crimes the same as anyone else would be. If anything police should be punished more severely for breaking the law than anyone else. Anyone they hire should have the same limitations imposed and any information gathered from third parties should be restricted in the same manner with respect to violations of civil and constitutional rights as if the police had gathered in the manner those third parties did.
In the case of data traversing the network it comes down to whether or not the network was functioning as private or public infrastructure. There is a very simple way to figure that out. Sue them for copyright infringement and if they claim they fall under the safe harbor provision they were acting as public infrastructure and a warrant is required for admissibility. You can't both claim to be legally blameless for the data I sent over your network and claim you own it and therefore I have no expectation of privacy with regard to it at the same time.
It's pretty serious news if "consultants" are allowed to violate rights of citizens that law enforcement themselves are not.
The restrictions on law enforcement should carry over to anyone working with them and the admissibility of anything found that way in court should be the same as if the FBI had carried out those actions themselves..
Those aren't CEOs those are people who founded and own their company and might happen to keep a CEO title. They can't even be fired they would have to fire themselves (though Gates did). That is an entirely different game than your typical scenario where the original people are outed in by the venture capital firm that ends up owning the company or what comes later when the board hires some Harvard blueblood MBA CEO.
Probably doesn't hurt to point out that while successful at making money, they are also generally terrible people for their industries. Gates and Ellison set back technology for at least 20 years (we are still running inferior tech because of their business success). Packard notoriously produced some of the worst technology in the sector with technicians dreading seeing one of the products produced under him and heart broken consumers discovering they'd bought the machine you couldn't upgrade. Jobs booted the actual brains behind the technology and ran Apple from producing advanced systems that rivaled the Amiga into being overpriced commodity crap that came in fancy packages and lots of color choices. Woz might have been lousy at business but he was the brains behind everything worthwhile at Apple.
Numbers don't prove that products aren't shitty, they prove they are popular which has very little relation to function. In tech and really STEM as a whole function is the only factor in whether or not something is shitty. It is common to see the best solution go under. Commodore produced far superior products to IBM and Apple but they went under. Convincing idiots your inferior product is trendy and cool will get you the numbers but doesn't make it even the slightest bit more or less shitty.
People would be much better off without Bill Gates and Steve Jobs deluding them into thinking they shouldn't be paying qualified engineers to both choose their technology and manage it for them. Just because wire is relatively simple to run and an outlet is easy to wire up does not mean you aren't an idiot if you are doing it yourself rather than hiring an electrician and neither does everything turning out fine 99 times out of a hundred when you do. Eventually that under spec'd wire you chose, that 10a outlet connected to a 20a breaker, that aluminum junction you used to splice it, or the location you ran it being a fire hazard in the attic is going to burn someone.
"Next week prices will be adjusted so you now need 1200$/week as a minimum."
That isn't accurate. Prices haven't gone up in Europe and China, etc where our goods and services come from. If anything they go down because employers no longer need to be concerned about the minimum wage and many of the homeless can now return to functioning roles in society.
Additionally, prices go up as a result of inflation but there is no net increase in the amount of money floating around just in who has it. Well there is more money but there is always more money, this does not increase the rate at which we create new money.
The federal reserve is constantly creating billions in new currency, they don't print new money, but they create new money digitally and they buy the money the treasury prints at the cost of printing not face value. They then loan this out to banks at interest that is so low it is virtually zero (especially when you consider that impact of inflation by the time they've paid it back). In fact, banks often turn around and buy treasury bills with that money turning it in to national debt but usually greed kicks in and they instead invest in the private sector where they get higher interest and it stimulates the economy. Banks can turn around and include this in their holdings on the next round and borrow yet more against it from the federal reserve. The economic theory behind all this is that a certain low amount of inflation means that the value of money will go down over time pressuring people to invest it, use it, and otherwise build new wealth if they are to break even let alone gain which keeps the economy moving. The federal reserve controls the tap for this new money by adjusting the federal interest rate.
So, a portion of the new money would then be diverted from profit generating handouts to banks to go directly to citizens. It's actually a small amount compared to what the federal reserve hands out to banks in loans. Any increase in inflation can fixed by increasing the federal interest rate which is currently is at an all time low. Since there isn't more money floating around, prices actually will not go up. Actually this would head off a currently inevitable doubling of the minimum wage which would increase labor costs and would definitely increase prices. Instead consumers will simply have more disposable income and be able to afford more goods and services while employers will have a reduced minimum labor expenditure allowing them to in some part reduce prices while increasing retail profits.
The $32k/yr per person this provides is pretty minimal here so most of us will be keeping our day job. But many may choose to go abroad and live where costs are lower. That works out just fine, they will reduce the local burden to produce supplies and services.
40hr per week job
What job? Golf? Lunch with other executives? The CEO is a few executive levels away from being someone who does anything other than ask their minions for their problems and then turn around and ask them to provide the solution which they in turn rubber stamp. You could chop all these and have the last group form a council and eliminate the executive level entirely.
Of course shareholders don't like this. People who actually do something at an organization tend to want to actually focus on improving the organization and its operations and shareholders want you to make the bad decisions that will result in a better earnings report this quarter and to hell with the next ten years.
Replace the minimum wage with a minimum income of $15/hr for every man/woman/child in the US with no requirements or limitations save citizenship.
Pay it straight from inflation and adjust fed rates accordingly so new money is slightly more expensive for banks and no actual increase in the inflation rate occurs.
Increase as we are able. We are the wealthiest nation in the world, let's automate the crap out of our work, outsource the rest, and establish a model for the rest of the world to follow when it catches up.
Industry collusion can largely negate realistic options. There is no reason services like netflix can't exist while preserving privacy (security is an illusion and therefore false by definition). But there is profit in stealing our data and therefore the industry creates an artificial dichotomy, choose between no/inferior service and your private data being stolen and sold by vendors.
"LG used a firmware update for its smart televisions to link the "smart" features of the device to viewer tracking and monitoring. Viewers who applied the update, but refused to consent to monitoring were not able to use services like Netflix and YouTube."
Consumers who opt-in and/or are opted in to data collection should have to be paid a mandatory non-transferable or waivable 50% commission on all sales of data and advertising revenues for which it is used or face fines which are at a minimum treble damages (paid back to consumers) without regard for damage to business model viability, bankruptcy, or allowance of settlements below the minimum and criminals penalties for negligent failure to prosecute.
Going to steal my data? If I can't stop you then you should at least have to split the proceeds 50/50 and be denied all manner of ways to pressure me into giving up my cut.
Something that deceptive is illegal on a television ad. Why is it a deception free-for-all in Vizio configuration menus or bills in congress for that matter.
This crap needs fixed. And frankly the privacy notices, terms and conditions, and end user license agreements should all be void if longer than 50 words in common English. Anything written for attorneys-by-attorneys does not constitute a meeting of minds when presented as an agreement for the purchase and use of a consumer good and/or service including a web based one and we all damn well know it.
There are too many such goods and services per consumer and too many consumers per good and/or service for hiring an attorney to review such agreements to be considered a reasonable burden or even to expect consumers to read them themselves at their current lengths. Additionally, allowing such long and complicated agreements allows for burying anti-consumer terms so complicated that they can't reasonably be used as a point of competition and instead become industry practice creating the same anti-consumer result as collusion or a monopoly.
"It may even arguably be a good thing by only serving you ads for things you might be interested in."
My personal data is my property. It's my right to decide who may have it, how valuable it is, and under what terms if any I will part with it. Seeing ads I might be interested in when I'm not even seeking to buy something is nowhere near as valuable as my privacy. Not even in the same ballpark. I'd be willing to bleed on a battlefield to protect the right to privacy and personal data.
The money isn't even going to me for my data, these companies are stealing what doesn't belong to them and selling it.
Slashdot was actually hiding some of the conversation.
But the current non-destructive method still isn't transcription regardless of what the GP said. It is a phone + app to take pictures, then apply a few tools to ocr and combine the text into your choice of digital file. This basically just puts the camera on a stand, provides a footpedal, and automates the toolchain to perform the same process. Not really a huge speedup.
Honestly though, most pirated books come from simply cracking the encryption on the popular formats from B&N and Amazon. Which gives much higher quality, eliminates OCR errors, and preserves the books digital structure, TOC, etc. You can then enjoy all the advantages including having you place sync'd between devices and so forth. There are dumps of every kindle book on Amazon.com periodically.
Not to say publishers won't attack this non-nonsensically but this is how people pirated books in the 90's not so much today. This really is only useful for people who want to legitimately back up and enjoy their own personal books.
"The announcement is a blow to privacy advocates who had petitioned the agency for stronger Internet privacy rules. But it's a win for many Silicon Valley companies whose business models rely on monetizing Internet users' personal data."
In other words, it is a loss for people. Last I checked the entire purpose of the FCC was to protect people from large corporate entities. Clearly laying down on the job today.
They claim... no before and after evidence presented.
The current process is removing the spine and running through a document feeder not typing manually.
Under the law they should in fact be judged by a combination of the two. The absolute judgement by action ignoring mitigating intent is not an old man thing, it is the new thing. There is a reason murder charges come in multiple degrees.
Ironically, it was largely members of the KKK being set free for hate crimes in the racist south that was used as the excuse for a massive power grab by the judicial and justification for lying to juries about their right to nullify the law where it's application was not just. For example, a judge will instruct jurors that they can not judge the law and therefore could not find you not guilty of assault charges in an instance where you tackled a man who mugging an elderly woman. The Constitution on the other hand empowers juries to do exactly that. Along with other little things like refusing to prosecute people who protest against the government or violated the "Snitch on your Neighbor Child Safety through Bread Tax and Exemptions to Unauthorized Systems Access Penalties for Copyright Cartels Puppy Love Act".
Do what is right and the hell with the law. Then face a jury of your peers who are actually informed of their right to nullify and face their judgement. They have every right to both be opposed to hacking systems and feel your actions in this case were the lesser of two evils. Their decisions are one off and set no precedent.