We all know fusion power is only 10 years away now after being 25 years away for the past 80, so limitless cheap, clean nuclear fusion power will dominate by 2050 for sure.
Most of them are like that yes; but you're going to find that same situation on any service where the creators of the community control the moderation. On any politically charged issue, or topic prone to groupthink, forget about it. But groups for non-political things have some value. My hometowns Facebook group is very useful for finding out about and discussing local events. It was especially great during Sandy; by far the most current and detailed news about what was going on, what was open, where the trucks with power outlets were, etc. Then there's my other group connecting the few people playing an old game. Back in college, the groups for student orgs, events, etc, were also of great value.
Actually, that's a trend. Local groups are generally ok, groups about something highly esoteric are sometimes ok depending on topic, but general interest, highly populated groups are generally shit. Political groups are just like r/The_Donald and/pol/, some of the most deranged morons on the internet.
So what's even left? Sounds like every single item constituting net neutrality has been removed. Might as well have just added a 'jk, this bill is null and void' at the end. What a corrupt scumbag.
Er forgot to add, surgical procedures are *all* it's used for... you can't get a prescription for cocaine for any condition. Unlike methamphetamine, which is given by prescription, even to children, as a last-line ADHD treatment if regular amphetamines and things like methylphenidate (Ritalin) don't work.
Simple, just like YouTube, they won't make sure fair use is properly evaluated at first. They'll simply rely on software like Content ID and only ever consider fair use if the site is big enough and generous enough to have appeals (that will, in the best case scenario, take weeks). Not really worth it to care if you want to upload something that new internet overlords don't like.
Unless you live in one of the few places that eliminated cash bail for misdemeanors, then you're wrong. You could challenge being held on bail because of childcare obligations, but scheduling that hearing takes a while, first appearance judges don't want to hear it. There's no law that sets misdemeanor bail to zero for parents, nor for people who can't post.
Microsoft is by far the worst offender because of Windows 10. They basically force installed it. It has all sorts of telemetry, and the lowest level is only available to corporate customers, and that's still not entirely off. There's no way to audit what's sent, but even what's explicitly admitted is seriously invasive. It exempts itself from the built in firewall and ignores the HOSTS file so that blocking it requires 3rd party tools and a lot of technical knowledge, since it also has a large list of hosts to try if you block one.
That's not all. It shows advertisements for other MS products right in the OS. It comes with dozens of crapware programs that get reinstalled during updates. Updates are practically forced too. What's to stop the government from making them use their telemetry file reading ability with a NSL?
Now add in the fact this is the dominant operating system, and required for some newer hardware, so avoiding it is much, much more of an inconvenience than avoiding Google. Anyone claiming MS isn't the worst offender for invading privacy is deluded or shilling.
Portugal decriminalized personal use quantities of heroin. Addiction went down. The number of people deterred by illegality is very, very small and more than offset by other factors.
I know the Secretary of State is technically a civilian, but come on. That article is talking about researchers and cases where strong administrative action was taken. And if she wasn't grossly negligent (having your housekeeper handle it doesn't count? Really?), it was only because it was explicitly intentional (she removed classified headers). So again, really?
He cleared Hillary of violating a law with no intent requirement because she lacked intent and claimed being extremely careless wasn't negligent. Almost everyone with a security clearance will tell you there's not a chance they'd not get charged for similar behavior, and indeed people have been prosecuted for far less, the submarine guy being the most egregious example. He clearly gave a pass to Hillary; the most reasonable explanation for the other actions was to try to make it seem like that's not what was going on. And if you think this is just one more partisan opinion, a quick glance at my history will illustrate how much I loathe Trump (and all (R)'s), a necessary point to make since people automatically assume anyone who thinks Hillary should have been charged is a Trump supporter.
Then, as has happened before, an enterprising geek will find a way to rip, decss, vpn, tor, p2p, IPV6 their way around or through the barriers.
A lot of policies aren't about stopping dedicated geeks, they're about raising the technical knowledge, time requirement, and risk level to the point where only a small number of geeks are doing it.
The origins of prohibition as a policy long predate the crackdown launched by Nixon, going all the way back to 1914 and the Harrison Narcotics Tax Act. And whatever the origin, the claims for the continuation of it now are entirely centered on false claims about it being necessary to prevent a large increase in abuse.
I do like calling SJWs racist when they support the WoD though.
How's about a better example then. Since your 'civilised' country still has backwards, barbaric drug policies that increase the level of harm, because they're unwilling to accept science and reason because of moral judgements, how do drug dealers handle a cashless economy?
(No country has acknowleged the failure of the War on Drugs and eliminated prohibition as their policy for drugs beyond pot. Only Portugal has even decriminalized personal possession of tiny quantities, still miles away from what a civilized, rational country would do if their interest actually was minimizing the harm of hard drugs; limited-access heroin maintenance programs are similarly far too narrow in scope to count. More civilized than the US != civilized)
Nothing is unique about it. The dogs sniff for electronics (TPPO on the circuit board) and/or storage media (HPK on CD/DVD/BR/Floppy). They will find any such device.
They're sniffing for triphenylphosphine oxide, which is found on all circuit boards, even microSD cards, and hydroxycyclohexyl phenyl ketone, found on CDs/DVDs/BluRays/Floppies. Link
It doesn't matter. Drug dogs are for one purpose only: a scam the police and courts have agreed on in order to nullify the 4th Amendment. In the latest case to affirm this insanity, SCOTUS ignored the large body of evidence proving that these dogs have a ridiculously high false positive rate; they want to please their master, so if their master wants to search, they'll alert no matter what. In some tests, it's actually *worse* than random chance. So the accuracy of the retraining program doesn't matter one bit. They'll say the dogs are retrained, and courts will go along with it blindly, accepting the cops word over scientific evidence.
The courts routinely ignore sound science in favor of junk assertions with no evidence. Take sex offender registration; all scientific studies have shown that sex offenders have the lowest recidivism rate of any offenders besides murderers. Yet instead of the countless studies to this effect, SCOTUS justifies registration because of the 'shockingly high recidivism' according to some opinion in a magazine backed up by no research that has since been retracted. They knew that, and ignored it.
All of those are extremely hackable as they have no security protocols whatsoever. You don't seem to understand what hacking is; it doesn't require doing it remotely, nor is it limited to full-fledged computers.
I could hack your thermostat's temperature sensor so it never turns off. I could hack your toaster by *adding* a microcontroller to its power circuit, to make the timing digital; same with your sprinkler timer. Hack your boatswitch by flipping the function of the buttons, or adding a remote trigger. And so on.
You have an awfully low id to have confused hacking with cracking; I hope that's not the case.
Don't need a ticket agent for that, just better kiosks. Looked it up just now and it appears their kiosks for some reason don't accept cash. NJ Transit figured this out a while ago, all the stations have kiosks that accept cash, and even give change in bills.
They should still have agents for other reasons, primarily because there's always people who can't use the kiosks, because of disability or just not understanding it. Or at least don't have a cash surcharge for on train purchase.
One glorious day in the future, we'll have displays that are entirely indistinguishable from reality, where you couldn't tell you weren't looking through a window.
On that day, and not a day before, these will become acceptable. Until then, I'm with ZorinLynx.
More importantly, never talk to them without a lawyer, and never ignore your lawyers advice about what to answer or how to answer it because you think you know better or because you think you can 'clear it up'. They love people who think they're clever.
The problem with that is with Republicans in charge, any net neutrality law would contain even more loopholes than the old FCC version. We saw that with Marsha Blackburn's bill. On top of that, relying on this or on inaction is a strategy of those opposed to it; they claim they're not opposed but want legislative action to decide it, but know that won't happen or won't be actual NN. While comprehensive net neutrality from Congress would be the better solution, enacting the FCC rules until that happens ensures bad practices won't get a foothold for the years it takes a bill to pass.
tl;dr Those opposing FCC regs until Congress acts are generally trying to see NN killed without admitting it.
Don't they already take such measures? Thought that was why a lot of pirated/copied videos are heavily distorted. Not just cropping either, the AR is often changed. Fingerprinting technology only goes so far; 3rd parties already produce so many false positives they flag bird songs and white noise.
Slashdot Mirror
We all know fusion power is only 10 years away now after being 25 years away for the past 80, so limitless cheap, clean nuclear fusion power will dominate by 2050 for sure.
Most of them are like that yes; but you're going to find that same situation on any service where the creators of the community control the moderation. On any politically charged issue, or topic prone to groupthink, forget about it. But groups for non-political things have some value. My hometowns Facebook group is very useful for finding out about and discussing local events. It was especially great during Sandy; by far the most current and detailed news about what was going on, what was open, where the trucks with power outlets were, etc. Then there's my other group connecting the few people playing an old game. Back in college, the groups for student orgs, events, etc, were also of great value. /pol/, some of the most deranged morons on the internet.
Actually, that's a trend. Local groups are generally ok, groups about something highly esoteric are sometimes ok depending on topic, but general interest, highly populated groups are generally shit. Political groups are just like r/The_Donald and
So what's even left? Sounds like every single item constituting net neutrality has been removed. Might as well have just added a 'jk, this bill is null and void' at the end. What a corrupt scumbag.
That's ridiculous. Small children acting under an adults instruction cannot be held criminally or civilly liable for their actions.
Er forgot to add, surgical procedures are *all* it's used for... you can't get a prescription for cocaine for any condition. Unlike methamphetamine, which is given by prescription, even to children, as a last-line ADHD treatment if regular amphetamines and things like methylphenidate (Ritalin) don't work.
Frequently would be a bit of an overstatement; it's used in a small number of surgeries, usually endoscopic sinus procedures.
Simple, just like YouTube, they won't make sure fair use is properly evaluated at first. They'll simply rely on software like Content ID and only ever consider fair use if the site is big enough and generous enough to have appeals (that will, in the best case scenario, take weeks). Not really worth it to care if you want to upload something that new internet overlords don't like.
Unless you live in one of the few places that eliminated cash bail for misdemeanors, then you're wrong. You could challenge being held on bail because of childcare obligations, but scheduling that hearing takes a while, first appearance judges don't want to hear it. There's no law that sets misdemeanor bail to zero for parents, nor for people who can't post.
Microsoft is by far the worst offender because of Windows 10. They basically force installed it. It has all sorts of telemetry, and the lowest level is only available to corporate customers, and that's still not entirely off. There's no way to audit what's sent, but even what's explicitly admitted is seriously invasive. It exempts itself from the built in firewall and ignores the HOSTS file so that blocking it requires 3rd party tools and a lot of technical knowledge, since it also has a large list of hosts to try if you block one.
That's not all. It shows advertisements for other MS products right in the OS. It comes with dozens of crapware programs that get reinstalled during updates. Updates are practically forced too. What's to stop the government from making them use their telemetry file reading ability with a NSL?
Now add in the fact this is the dominant operating system, and required for some newer hardware, so avoiding it is much, much more of an inconvenience than avoiding Google. Anyone claiming MS isn't the worst offender for invading privacy is deluded or shilling.
Portugal decriminalized personal use quantities of heroin. Addiction went down. The number of people deterred by illegality is very, very small and more than offset by other factors.
I know the Secretary of State is technically a civilian, but come on. That article is talking about researchers and cases where strong administrative action was taken. And if she wasn't grossly negligent (having your housekeeper handle it doesn't count? Really?), it was only because it was explicitly intentional (she removed classified headers). So again, really?
He cleared Hillary of violating a law with no intent requirement because she lacked intent and claimed being extremely careless wasn't negligent. Almost everyone with a security clearance will tell you there's not a chance they'd not get charged for similar behavior, and indeed people have been prosecuted for far less, the submarine guy being the most egregious example. He clearly gave a pass to Hillary; the most reasonable explanation for the other actions was to try to make it seem like that's not what was going on. And if you think this is just one more partisan opinion, a quick glance at my history will illustrate how much I loathe Trump (and all (R)'s), a necessary point to make since people automatically assume anyone who thinks Hillary should have been charged is a Trump supporter.
Then, as has happened before, an enterprising geek will find a way to rip, decss, vpn, tor, p2p, IPV6 their way around or through the barriers.
A lot of policies aren't about stopping dedicated geeks, they're about raising the technical knowledge, time requirement, and risk level to the point where only a small number of geeks are doing it.
The origins of prohibition as a policy long predate the crackdown launched by Nixon, going all the way back to 1914 and the Harrison Narcotics Tax Act. And whatever the origin, the claims for the continuation of it now are entirely centered on false claims about it being necessary to prevent a large increase in abuse.
I do like calling SJWs racist when they support the WoD though.
How's about a better example then. Since your 'civilised' country still has backwards, barbaric drug policies that increase the level of harm, because they're unwilling to accept science and reason because of moral judgements, how do drug dealers handle a cashless economy?
(No country has acknowleged the failure of the War on Drugs and eliminated prohibition as their policy for drugs beyond pot. Only Portugal has even decriminalized personal possession of tiny quantities, still miles away from what a civilized, rational country would do if their interest actually was minimizing the harm of hard drugs; limited-access heroin maintenance programs are similarly far too narrow in scope to count. More civilized than the US != civilized)
Nothing is unique about it. The dogs sniff for electronics (TPPO on the circuit board) and/or storage media (HPK on CD/DVD/BR/Floppy). They will find any such device.
They're sniffing for triphenylphosphine oxide, which is found on all circuit boards, even microSD cards, and hydroxycyclohexyl phenyl ketone, found on CDs/DVDs/BluRays/Floppies. Link
It doesn't matter. Drug dogs are for one purpose only: a scam the police and courts have agreed on in order to nullify the 4th Amendment. In the latest case to affirm this insanity, SCOTUS ignored the large body of evidence proving that these dogs have a ridiculously high false positive rate; they want to please their master, so if their master wants to search, they'll alert no matter what. In some tests, it's actually *worse* than random chance. So the accuracy of the retraining program doesn't matter one bit. They'll say the dogs are retrained, and courts will go along with it blindly, accepting the cops word over scientific evidence.
The courts routinely ignore sound science in favor of junk assertions with no evidence. Take sex offender registration; all scientific studies have shown that sex offenders have the lowest recidivism rate of any offenders besides murderers. Yet instead of the countless studies to this effect, SCOTUS justifies registration because of the 'shockingly high recidivism' according to some opinion in a magazine backed up by no research that has since been retracted. They knew that, and ignored it.
All of those are extremely hackable as they have no security protocols whatsoever. You don't seem to understand what hacking is; it doesn't require doing it remotely, nor is it limited to full-fledged computers.
I could hack your thermostat's temperature sensor so it never turns off. I could hack your toaster by *adding* a microcontroller to its power circuit, to make the timing digital; same with your sprinkler timer. Hack your boatswitch by flipping the function of the buttons, or adding a remote trigger. And so on.
You have an awfully low id to have confused hacking with cracking; I hope that's not the case.
Don't need a ticket agent for that, just better kiosks. Looked it up just now and it appears their kiosks for some reason don't accept cash. NJ Transit figured this out a while ago, all the stations have kiosks that accept cash, and even give change in bills.
They should still have agents for other reasons, primarily because there's always people who can't use the kiosks, because of disability or just not understanding it. Or at least don't have a cash surcharge for on train purchase.
One glorious day in the future, we'll have displays that are entirely indistinguishable from reality, where you couldn't tell you weren't looking through a window.
On that day, and not a day before, these will become acceptable. Until then, I'm with ZorinLynx.
More importantly, never talk to them without a lawyer, and never ignore your lawyers advice about what to answer or how to answer it because you think you know better or because you think you can 'clear it up'. They love people who think they're clever.
The problem with that is with Republicans in charge, any net neutrality law would contain even more loopholes than the old FCC version. We saw that with Marsha Blackburn's bill. On top of that, relying on this or on inaction is a strategy of those opposed to it; they claim they're not opposed but want legislative action to decide it, but know that won't happen or won't be actual NN. While comprehensive net neutrality from Congress would be the better solution, enacting the FCC rules until that happens ensures bad practices won't get a foothold for the years it takes a bill to pass.
tl;dr Those opposing FCC regs until Congress acts are generally trying to see NN killed without admitting it.
My guess is it won't even start, let alone last. "Or straight up trolling" is a loophole big enough to drive a Star Destroyer through.
Don't they already take such measures? Thought that was why a lot of pirated/copied videos are heavily distorted. Not just cropping either, the AR is often changed. Fingerprinting technology only goes so far; 3rd parties already produce so many false positives they flag bird songs and white noise.