However, the problem lies not just with the govt abusing it. It also lies with the teeming masses who not only make these devices succeed in the market, but do so to an extent that begins to push all other choices OUT of the market. Society is re-forming itself in the shape of a surveillance state, and it's not being forced down people's throats at gunpoint, it's being asked for.
Moran.
People are buying electronic devices for their entertainment and convenience, not so the government can illegally spy on them. And people shouldn't have to become luddites in order for the government not to violate their basic rights.
If Apple was a patent troll, you'd hear about them suing other companies on an hourly basis, not every few years. You do know that Samsung sued Apple as well, right? Right?
It's amazing what a few hand-written letters to your congressman from a constituent in their district, especially one who works in the technology business, can do.
Only if they have checks to the sum of four or five figures attached to the letter.
The H1-B laws as written are pretty good: you have to pay at least average, and you must have at least tried to hire a US citizen.
Nah, they were a travesty from the start - increase the size of the labor pool to benefit corporations, with the intended side effect of forcing down wages for the worker. Supply and demand for thee, not for me. The invisible pimp hand of capitalism, bitch-slapping the unskilled worker with its hand - and then the skilled worker with the backhand.
No. They haven't. Apple could have gone full on patent troll in the mid 90's, when their stock was trading for three bucks a share. Their patent library, though not on the scale of IBM's, was still huge. You hatebois also ignore the fact that Samsung sued Apple at the same time, and also got the South Korean government to ban the iPhone for the first two years of its existence.
Translation: you're going to stick to your hateboi storyline, even if it's false. In that case, why don't you throw out the canard about Foxconn employees making iPod's committing suicide, even though the plant in question was producing Xbox's?
I wish I could mod this "-1 Wrong." What you're talking about is innovation. Innovation to replace a technology with a better technology is great.
-1 Hatorade
Just because it's not innovation you like doesn't mean that it's not innovation. Same for the first iMac and USB - Apple didn't invent the connector, but ditching legacy connections to lower cost and slim the design was innovative.
But this isn't innovation, this is forcing your users into using a proprietary technology that is cumbersome and worse than the technology it replaces, and blah blah blah
Look. If you need a phone with a headphone jack....fucking buy a phone with a headphone jack. Same as buying a phone that has a fucking swappable battery, or a fucking SD card slot.
Just buy the phone you want that does what you want and stop being a crybaby about it.
Actually, they are almost identical in their nature
Actually, it shows you're throwing out a couple of Big Words you've heard, with nothing approaching an understanding of either term.
they both advocate a supposedly temporary period of totalitarian government in order to achieve their goals, and they both promise to take from the rich and give to the poor. In practice, they both lead to poverty, violence, oppression, police states, and economic collapse.
Which is false, false, false, false, false, false and false, respectively.
Racist editor entrenched wikipedia articles is never a good citation nor a good source of knowlege.
Racist projection and hand waving noted. Cops are quite happy to screw over or murder innocent white people as well - just ask Michael Morton, Kelly Thomas and Cameron Todd Willingham.
65 people in a year, nationwide, doesn't sound very "numerous" to me.
65 times the number of examples given by the parent poster.
But for comparison, around 267 people in the US are struck by lightning each year. Just sayin'.
Or...just bein' willfully obtuse. Those 65 people tricked or intimidated into false confessions made up almost half - 44% - of the number of innocent people released from prison in 2015. And we know there are a lot more than 267 innocent people still in prison.
Obey the instructions of the police officer and let your lawyer / attorney / barrister handle any disputes. The solution does not even require technology. Priceless.
And when the cop shoots you for following his "lawful orders"? How about when they shoot you before saying anything, like Tamir Rice or John Crawford?
No amount of authoritarian bootlicking will save your ass from a cop bent on shooting you.
You mean other than their training? Compare what an officer is trained to see to a recent shooting in my area.
You mean an anecdote? How about we look at the numbers of people who have been released from prison after being proved innocent, who were badgered into confessing by police interrogators - 65 out of 149 last year. Like prosecutors, cops are far, far, far more interested in "winning" than in actual justice.
And cops invariably lie when caught in an unjustified shooting, to cover their own asses. If a cop tells you that nighttime is darker than daytime? Go outside after sundown to check and make sure he was telling the truth.
Or maybe you could stop being a racist shit. Black men use drugs at the same rate as white women, yet are 45 times more likely to serve time. Because of selective enforcement, which leads to a neat loop that took racists like yourself some time to perfect: minorities make up more of the convictions, so they are targeted more for arrest by cops. Which makes them more likely to be convicted...
The drone does not pose a privacy risk that isn't already posed by aircraft, when operated legally.
I see you went to the Pete Hoekstra school of analogies. Where to even begin? You have to have a pilots license to fly the lowliest crop duster - which can't be purchased for a few hundred dollars (or less) from Wal-Mart. Aircraft take off and land from airports or airstrips, not in the middle of residential areas. And yeah, it would be a violation of your privacy if a helicopter pilot decided to hover over your property at low altitude.
You shoot it with a camera, show that its camera was or at least could have been facing your daughter, and go to the DA. If they're doing their job, after consulting an expert they can file suit on your behalf and subpoena any camera footage if there is a legitimate privacy concern.
Pete. Pete. Pete. Up here, Pete. And how is the property owner going to know which house the drone came from, much less who the pilot was? You think the county sheriff is going to serve a warrant on a neighborhood and search house by house for a drone?
You're also an asshole if you shoot a drone out of the air with a shotgun where it may pose a significant fire hazard. There's assholes all around in this story.
Wrong. There's only one asshole in the story, the pilot who got an $1800 lesson in common courtesy.
Telemetry from the drone suggests it was much higher than the shooter claimed.
Yes, the pilot claimed 200 feet - but that's past the effective 40 yard range of most shotguns. And how accurate is that telemetry?
He had received a request from a friend who's house was on that flight line to fly over his house.
Then he should have checked with the other neighbors to see if it was ok, or at least so they would know he was taking pictures of his friends house and not looking for houses to break into. Seems the pilot got a $1800 lesson in common courtesy.
Footage from the drone as it is shot alone seems to prove that he was taking area shots not focusing on any one house.
Depending on the camera's zoom, you could take either a wide shot of someone's house, or be trying to get a closeup of someone's window.
And the author of Forrest Gump didn't see any royalties from the movie, because it didn't make any money - too many studio costs, advertising deals, etc. So your friend might have to make do with a Lexus instead of a Bentley for a few years if she has a lot of Medicare/Medicaid patients - she'll manage to get by.
Except, it wasn't Rumsfeld who went before the U.N. to sell the invasion of Iraq, but Colin Powell. And after him and Rice, Hillary and Kerry sure sold the wars in Libya and Syria. And it's the State Department that sells hundreds of billions in weapons to friendly regimes, gives billions in military aid to Israel, and takes point in negotiations to maintain and lengthen the Pentagon's list of military bases while expanding NATO.
So I posit that disagreements between DOD and State are a) pure political theater b) like an old married couple who basically agree on everything, but argue about it anyway.
Banal corporatist propaganda. And yes, the math isbasic: very little of the cost of drugs comes from R&D. Much of which is taxpayer-financed through public universities, but due to incestious relationships made possible by Bob Dole, are patented so the taxpayer can enjoy paying through the nose to buy drugs she paid to develop.
You want real innovation and real reforms on drug prices? Reduce the length of drug patents to zero, and make all drug research publicly financed. R&D would no longer be focused on what is the most profitable, and instead the most needed. Drug prices would crater, as billions would no longer be spent on tv ads, no more dividends would be paid, and executive coke-and-hooker vacations to the Bahamas would be a thing of the past.
Socialized medicine: the fiscally conservative option. Always has been, always will be.
Works fine everywhere else because you have the US paying for their sandbagging asses
Delusional. The only thing being sandbagged is your dumb ass, paying for advertising budgets and corporate getaways to the Bahamas. Not basic drug R&D - you already paid that as a taxpayer, in a grant to a public university, that was then gift-wrapped as a patent to a pharmaceutical company.
Because you want people to die in the streets, or because you are against a reliable, extremely efficient retirement system?
POSSIBLY mandate a 401(k)-type system instead.
Because you're a fascist who wants a worker to take 100% of the risk, put up 100% of the capital, yet only see a 30% return on his money because the rest is taken up by bank fees?
Let me invest it in an index fund or a Fidelity fund of my choosing (Fidelity has much lower fees).
So it's subject to the whims of the market, as opposed to a guaranteed amount.
Get rid of welfare, or at least turn it into workfare. (Cleaning streets, etc.)
Already done in the 90's, by that right-wing president, Bill Clinton. Which through poor families out on the street based on right-wing fairy tale thinking. Your Ranidan grasp of events is as dated as your talking points.
Slashdot Mirror
Moran.
People are buying electronic devices for their entertainment and convenience, not so the government can illegally spy on them. And people shouldn't have to become luddites in order for the government not to violate their basic rights.
If Apple was a patent troll, you'd hear about them suing other companies on an hourly basis, not every few years. You do know that Samsung sued Apple as well, right? Right?
Only if they have checks to the sum of four or five figures attached to the letter.
Nah, they were a travesty from the start - increase the size of the labor pool to benefit corporations, with the intended side effect of forcing down wages for the worker. Supply and demand for thee, not for me. The invisible pimp hand of capitalism, bitch-slapping the unskilled worker with its hand - and then the skilled worker with the backhand.
No. They haven't. Apple could have gone full on patent troll in the mid 90's, when their stock was trading for three bucks a share. Their patent library, though not on the scale of IBM's, was still huge. You hatebois also ignore the fact that Samsung sued Apple at the same time, and also got the South Korean government to ban the iPhone for the first two years of its existence.
But, hatebois gotta hate.
Translation: you're going to stick to your hateboi storyline, even if it's false. In that case, why don't you throw out the canard about Foxconn employees making iPod's committing suicide, even though the plant in question was producing Xbox's?
-1 Hatorade
Just because it's not innovation you like doesn't mean that it's not innovation. Same for the first iMac and USB - Apple didn't invent the connector, but ditching legacy connections to lower cost and slim the design was innovative.
Look. If you need a phone with a headphone jack....fucking buy a phone with a headphone jack. Same as buying a phone that has a fucking swappable battery, or a fucking SD card slot.
Just buy the phone you want that does what you want and stop being a crybaby about it.
FTFY
Don't know how many, but they're right-wing, red baiting, partisan fools.
Actually, it shows you're throwing out a couple of Big Words you've heard, with nothing approaching an understanding of either term.
Which is false, false, false, false, false, false and false, respectively.
Racist projection and hand waving noted. Cops are quite happy to screw over or murder innocent white people as well - just ask Michael Morton, Kelly Thomas and Cameron Todd Willingham.
65 times the number of examples given by the parent poster.
Or...just bein' willfully obtuse. Those 65 people tricked or intimidated into false confessions made up almost half - 44% - of the number of innocent people released from prison in 2015. And we know there are a lot more than 267 innocent people still in prison.
And when the cop shoots you for following his "lawful orders"? How about when they shoot you before saying anything, like Tamir Rice or John Crawford?
No amount of authoritarian bootlicking will save your ass from a cop bent on shooting you.
Neat goalpost moving, but the removal of lead from gas is a non sequitur on the subject of removing lead from pipes and paint.
You mean an anecdote? How about we look at the numbers of people who have been released from prison after being proved innocent, who were badgered into confessing by police interrogators - 65 out of 149 last year. Like prosecutors, cops are far, far, far more interested in "winning" than in actual justice.
And cops invariably lie when caught in an unjustified shooting, to cover their own asses. If a cop tells you that nighttime is darker than daytime? Go outside after sundown to check and make sure he was telling the truth.
Or maybe you could stop being a racist shit. Black men use drugs at the same rate as white women, yet are 45 times more likely to serve time. Because of selective enforcement, which leads to a neat loop that took racists like yourself some time to perfect: minorities make up more of the convictions, so they are targeted more for arrest by cops. Which makes them more likely to be convicted...
And how many of your precious little snowflakes whine about Apple's "walled garden" and then go fire up a game console?
I see you went to the Pete Hoekstra school of analogies. Where to even begin? You have to have a pilots license to fly the lowliest crop duster - which can't be purchased for a few hundred dollars (or less) from Wal-Mart. Aircraft take off and land from airports or airstrips, not in the middle of residential areas. And yeah, it would be a violation of your privacy if a helicopter pilot decided to hover over your property at low altitude.
Pete. Pete. Pete. Up here, Pete. And how is the property owner going to know which house the drone came from, much less who the pilot was? You think the county sheriff is going to serve a warrant on a neighborhood and search house by house for a drone?
Wrong. There's only one asshole in the story, the pilot who got an $1800 lesson in common courtesy.
Yes, the pilot claimed 200 feet - but that's past the effective 40 yard range of most shotguns. And how accurate is that telemetry?
Then he should have checked with the other neighbors to see if it was ok, or at least so they would know he was taking pictures of his friends house and not looking for houses to break into. Seems the pilot got a $1800 lesson in common courtesy.
Depending on the camera's zoom, you could take either a wide shot of someone's house, or be trying to get a closeup of someone's window.
Then take your drone to a park.
Non sequitur.
And cops shoot or beat innocent people to death in the streets. That mean it's ok if you take a bat to some stranger out walking his dog?
And the author of Forrest Gump didn't see any royalties from the movie, because it didn't make any money - too many studio costs, advertising deals, etc. So your friend might have to make do with a Lexus instead of a Bentley for a few years if she has a lot of Medicare/Medicaid patients - she'll manage to get by.
Except, it wasn't Rumsfeld who went before the U.N. to sell the invasion of Iraq, but Colin Powell. And after him and Rice, Hillary and Kerry sure sold the wars in Libya and Syria. And it's the State Department that sells hundreds of billions in weapons to friendly regimes, gives billions in military aid to Israel, and takes point in negotiations to maintain and lengthen the Pentagon's list of military bases while expanding NATO.
So I posit that disagreements between DOD and State are a) pure political theater b) like an old married couple who basically agree on everything, but argue about it anyway.
Banal corporatist propaganda. And yes, the math is basic: very little of the cost of drugs comes from R&D. Much of which is taxpayer-financed through public universities, but due to incestious relationships made possible by Bob Dole, are patented so the taxpayer can enjoy paying through the nose to buy drugs she paid to develop.
You want real innovation and real reforms on drug prices? Reduce the length of drug patents to zero, and make all drug research publicly financed. R&D would no longer be focused on what is the most profitable, and instead the most needed. Drug prices would crater, as billions would no longer be spent on tv ads, no more dividends would be paid, and executive coke-and-hooker vacations to the Bahamas would be a thing of the past.
Socialized medicine: the fiscally conservative option. Always has been, always will be.
Delusional. The only thing being sandbagged is your dumb ass, paying for advertising budgets and corporate getaways to the Bahamas. Not basic drug R&D - you already paid that as a taxpayer, in a grant to a public university, that was then gift-wrapped as a patent to a pharmaceutical company.
Because you want people to die in the streets, or because you are against a reliable, extremely efficient retirement system?
Because you're a fascist who wants a worker to take 100% of the risk, put up 100% of the capital, yet only see a 30% return on his money because the rest is taken up by bank fees?
So it's subject to the whims of the market, as opposed to a guaranteed amount.
Already done in the 90's, by that right-wing president, Bill Clinton. Which through poor families out on the street based on right-wing fairy tale thinking. Your Ranidan grasp of events is as dated as your talking points.