If it's being shipped from India, I doubt it's U.S. customs stealing anything.
India, on the other hand, has a well known reputation for either delaying or "losing" a lot from valuable packages unless the proper bribe is paid to the right person.
If Obama never had a filibuster proof majority in Congress during his term, then how did Obamacare pass with zero Republican votes?
The fact is he had a filibuster proof 60 votes in the Senate until Massachusetts decided their proposals sucked so much they voted in a Republican to replace Kennedy, Scott Brown was sworn in on 2/4/10. Prior to that they had Democrat Paul Kirk replacing Kennedy.
Pretty sure you're exaggerating the "anyone" part of that claim.
The fact is that many parts of our society are in an echo chamber of similar opinions. For the left, that'd include most of academia in the "soft" sciences, much of the traditional media outlets, big portions of government bureaucracies, Hollywood, and SF/Seattle based tech companies like Google. For the right, you'd get something similar in the lower to mid ranks of the military, or in an evangelical church, for example. Anywhere people spend most of their time working and socializing with people who they tend to agree with politically.
The bias exercised by reporters isn't usually a conscious one (although it's certainly gotten much more blatant in the last couple of years), but rather one where their echo chamber considers certain topics a certain way, considers certain sources they agree with as more reliable than ones they disagree with, thinks about stories in such a way to be sure and emphasize the parts which support their world view and suppress the parts which inconveniently don't, plus minimize the stories which don't support their "side" and emphasize the ones which do.
The bias at places like Google is similar. When they go to train their algorithms, they'll naturally start with trusted sources they personally trust, which will happen to be mostly left-leaning. When they get a complaint about "hate speech" at YouTube, they'll naturally be more inclined to suppress stuff they personally consider terrible (blacks suck!), while letting slide something similar they don't find as offensive (whites suck!).
Sure, as the video demonstrates, they have out and out efforts to get out the Hispanic vote, or to save Obama/Hillary from their latest technical incompetence crisis by donating support, but most of the impact isn't from that, it's from the more subtle type of bias which if you asked them about, they'd just say they were just doing what they "objectively" thought was right. It just happens that since they think about many things from a more left-wing perspective, that's what they perceive is right.
Except there aren't any prominent right-wingers using this video to say Google executives/employees shouldn't have the right to say any of what they said in the video. Quite the opposite, they're happy to have them explain their left-wing views on camera. They're using the video to contradict the claim that executives and most staff at Google are unbiased when it comes to politics, when it's obvious with everything from free labor donations to Democratic campaigns to actual 90% of the cash donations they make that they lean very heavily to the left.
If Google's folks admitted they were mostly left-wing in how they run things at Google, then no one would care about the video.
So yes, Republicans support freedom of speech, including for business executives and other employees, they just object to their political opponents publicly claiming they aren't against them while privately holding a wake because the GOP won.
It is amazing this article and summary spends so much time talking about what two Democrats said, as opposed to what's happened and what the Republicans have done, which is more than Warner or Warren ever did. It's almost like to Techcrunch, Republicans don't exist except as targets to attack.
Funny how this very topically relevant information didn't make the "article", but the current Congress passed and Trump signed a bill taking effect 9/21 which according to the FTC includes provides for:
Free credit freezes
What is it? A credit freeze restricts access to your credit file, making it harder for identity thieves to open new accounts in your name. Usually you get a PIN to use each time you want to freeze and unfreeze your account to apply for new credit.
What’s new? Currently, credit freezes may involve fees, based on state law. Starting this fall, it will be free to freeze and unfreeze your credit file throughout the country.
Free child credit freezes
What is it? A child credit freeze allows you to freeze a child’s credit file until the child is old enough to use credit.
What’s new? Currently, some state laws allow you to freeze a child’s credit file. Starting September 21st, no matter where you live, you’ll be able to get a free credit freeze for children under age 16.
Year-long fraud alerts
What is it? A fraud alert will tell any business that runs your credit that they should check with you before opening a new account.
What’s new? Currently, fraud alerts last 90 days. Starting this fall, an initial fraud alert will last for one year. It will still be free and identity theft victims can still get an extended fraud alert for seven years.
The article makes much about a letter Warren sent, but doesn't mention what the committee Chair, Hatch sent:
Provide the Committee a detailed timeline of the breach, including when it began, its discovery, the investigation of its scope and source, notification of authorities, efforts to notify customers and consumers, notification to the Equifax board of directors, and notification of Equifax senior executives – including, but not limited to, John Gamble Jr., Rodolfo Ploder, and Joseph Loughran.
Please describe Equifax’s efforts to identify the scope of affected consumers and breadth of information compromised.
What steps has Equifax taken to identify and limit potential consumer harm associated with this breach?
Does Equifax plan to provide notice to each affected consumer, or will it rely on the consumer-initiated checks found at “equifaxsecurity2017.com” to inform them?
Your firm set up a website, “equifaxsecurity2017.com,” in the wake of this announcement.
Programming doesn't require 150+ IQ. Maybe 115 for an average programmer. An average CS student is in the 120-125 range. I suggest addressing your question as a reply to the comment which said it requires 150+ IQ to find out why he thinks that.
The most commonly used individual IQ test series is the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale for adults and the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children for school-age test-takers. Other commonly used individual IQ tests (some of which do not label their standard scores as "IQ" scores) include the current versions of the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales, Woodcock-Johnson Tests of Cognitive Abilities, the Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children, the Cognitive Assessment System, and the Differential Ability Scales.
and
American psychologist Lewis Terman at Stanford University revised the Binet-Simon scale, which resulted in the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales (1916). It became the most popular test in the United States for decades.
and
The Stanford-Binet has also been revised several times and is now similar to the Wechsler in several aspects, but the Wechsler continues to be the most popular test in the United States.
Besides the Wechsler and Standford-Binet tests which I mentioned in my comment, which test are you claiming as being used so much more in the US to be the "standard" which also has your much lower scale?
1. And as opposed to "nothing", the current Congress did pass and Trump did sign a bill which takes effect in 15 days which according to the FTC includes:
Free credit freezes
What is it? A credit freeze restricts access to your credit file, making it harder for identity thieves to open new accounts in your name. Usually you get a PIN to use each time you want to freeze and unfreeze your account to apply for new credit.
What’s new? Currently, credit freezes may involve fees, based on state law. Starting this fall, it will be free to freeze and unfreeze your credit file throughout the country.
Free child credit freezes
What is it? A child credit freeze allows you to freeze a child’s credit file until the child is old enough to use credit.
What’s new? Currently, some state laws allow you to freeze a child’s credit file. Starting September 21st, no matter where you live, you’ll be able to get a free credit freeze for children under age 16.
Year-long fraud alerts
What is it? A fraud alert will tell any business that runs your credit that they should check with you before opening a new account.
What’s new? Currently, fraud alerts last 90 days. Starting this fall, an initial fraud alert will last for one year. It will still be free and identity theft victims can still get an extended fraud alert for seven years.
2. Equifax is still in court with the Feds, but they already "entered into a consent order with eight states that requires it to improve its data-protection practices in the wake of the huge data breach last year at the national credit-reporting agency."
“The conditions Equifax agreed to in the consent order require the company’s board to remediate the deficiencies and unsafe practices that contributed to the breach,” the Texas Department of Banking said in a statement.
The order covers everything from risk assessments and improved oversight of information security and technology by Equifax’s board of directors and its audit committee to vendor management and the patching of software systems. Equifax is required to submit to the states by July 31 a list of all remediation projects it has begun or planned since the breach, and to submit progress reports going forward. The states will conduct on-site reviews to assess compliance.
Having a measured IQ >150, I can tell you with my excellent two-minute Googling skills there are approximately 300K in the U.S. if you're using the Stanford-Binet scale. For the Wechsler scale, it's more like 140K, which is still a lot of people. Heck, the Prometheus Society's cut-off for membership is 160+. I guess to you, they basically don't exist...
It doesn't surprise me that an Anon coward completely misrepresents what was cited.
Perhaps you're genuinely just unable to read a chart, but the media bias chart linked puts InfoWars under the "Most Extreme Right" category, labeled "Contains inaccurate/fabricated info" and "Nonsense damaging to public discourse".
Narrative fail: 1. I rarely hear directly from Trump saying anything and I see anything on Fox News about once every two years ago. Sorry to contradict your premises. 2. I asked for specific facts, an actual example of the guy's claim. He could produce no quotes even resembling what he claimed. He presented no relevant facts at all. Your resort to attacking the person simply asking for an example or two is quite revealing about your level of irrational obsession. How about you get someone to actually present some relevant facts to the claim which was made before accusing people of ignoring them?
A single machine-assisted human is currently more expensive than two cheap humans, but the economics of that can obviously change.
Machines-only is much less likely than less work done by humans and more of it done by machines in collaboration with humans. It's usually easier to leave a human to do the smaller parts which can't be automated yet than to automate the entire process.
Right, because Amazon owes all those specific welfare recipients a job and is required to pay them more than they're worth, regardless of how much their work contributes to the company's bottom line or not, right? That's you're false premise. Amazon isn't responsible for the life situation of the people who apply to work there, those people are.
The expected result of this bill would be for large employers to stop hiring welfare recipients at all, making their lives worse and significantly reducing their ability to live and to eventually get off welfare.
It's a really simple and well-understood principle. If you raise taxes on something (increase the cost of it), you will get less people buying that something.
If you massively raise taxes on employing poor people, then the expected result is that way less poor people will be employed. Apparently these idiots are unable to consider that not being able to get a job will help get them off welfare sooner. More likely, they prefer more people staying on welfare, as it increases their political base.
Don't worry, your initial instinct was right. Book deals like Bernie, Hillary, Obama get are essentially rewards/bribes for left-wing politicians. In Bernie's case, his books would have had to sell 5x as many copies as they actually did in order for him to have "earned" his giant advance from the publisher. For anyone else with that kind of advance/sales, that'd be a disaster for the publisher, but he has enough power/influence that it's written off as "supporting the right ideas" and a cost of their doing business.
The current U.S. health care system is about as far removed from free market capitalism as you can get without going full communist. How does that show anything about capitalism, except what happens when you remove free market incentives and substitute the government incentivizing third-party payers, massive amounts of regulations on both providing health care and paying for it, subsidies, literal government takeover of 2/3 of the market (via medicare/medicaid/VA, etc...), plus putting the government and a union (AMA) in charge of restricting supply?
Amazon and Walmart pay more people to work less hours in direct response to the incentive structure the government created for them. The response to this law (if it ever passed) would be the same, hiring less more expensive workers and automation/machinery to do the work and no longer employing welfare recipients. That's going to suck for the welfare recipients when they can only get a job at companies with less than 500 employees, because it costs too much to employ them at a larger company.
Maybe Bernie can propose a law repealing the laws of gravity and perpetual motion next, so we can all have free energy and anti-gravity devices...
The obvious solution is to give/sell them to the people who use them and have guests who use them. Make ownership in the local road company part of the bundle of rights which normally transfer with property rights. Then the people who actually need/use the roads can determine how they want them managed and paid for.
Exactly. This law just leads to large companies no longer hiring the people who need basic low-end jobs the most, the poor who get welfare benefits. Instead of two $15-16/hour workers, they'll hire one $2-30/hour worker and a machine to help them do their job. Right now having more lower paid workers is more cost effective, but this law would shift that balance and put them out of work instead. And then Bernie will blame "the corporations" for the expected results of the policies he proposed.
As a result, if you get welfare, you'll basically only be able to get a job at a company with less than 500 workers, because they'll have to pay you way less than a large company would, similar to the situation in France which (economically inefficiently, costing everyone wealth and standard of living) has way more small businesses than the U.S. does, almost all right at the 50 employee limit where their super employee bureaucracy kicks in.
Fortunately, this proposed law is merely a political stunt and has zero chance of passing in the near future.
You don't need the end user to have root access, you just need to have an update process running which can acquire root access, or at least access to the files which need to be updated.
So you give each appliance a private/public keypair and the public key of your update server. The process which has access to update would then only accept encrypted updates both designated for that appliance's specific key and signed using the update server's private key. Mutual authentication.
You can do that online via a TLS session, or offline using USB sticks or whatever. It's easy enough to automate either process, although the USB version would require someone to physically plug something in.
Another way to increase the security of the process is to require a reboot before any system files can actually be updated. It's more disruptive, but presumably if you have any sort of proper monitoring setup, an unplanned reboot shouldn't be missed.
Regulatory compliance comes at a cost. Whether or not you're going to do anything which would be bad for your customers (who are the people you're having to convince to pay you for your services), you're still required to do all the paperwork and comply with all the whims of the regulators.
Also, if you're pointing at Portugal, that just shows you're getting your news from somewhere you should start ignoring.
It'll be interesting to watch a national wireless company offer two versions of their plans, the "normal" plan, and then the "California" plan, which would be the normal plan with the same cost and bandwidth usage, but without any zero rating for video.
I suspect some California customers would complain about that.
Slashdot Mirror
If it's being shipped from India, I doubt it's U.S. customs stealing anything.
India, on the other hand, has a well known reputation for either delaying or "losing" a lot from valuable packages unless the proper bribe is paid to the right person.
If Obama never had a filibuster proof majority in Congress during his term, then how did Obamacare pass with zero Republican votes?
The fact is he had a filibuster proof 60 votes in the Senate until Massachusetts decided their proposals sucked so much they voted in a Republican to replace Kennedy, Scott Brown was sworn in on 2/4/10. Prior to that they had Democrat Paul Kirk replacing Kennedy.
The other few billion people who don't feel the need to live in Palo Alto or anywhere nearby?
Pretty sure you're exaggerating the "anyone" part of that claim.
The fact is that many parts of our society are in an echo chamber of similar opinions. For the left, that'd include most of academia in the "soft" sciences, much of the traditional media outlets, big portions of government bureaucracies, Hollywood, and SF/Seattle based tech companies like Google. For the right, you'd get something similar in the lower to mid ranks of the military, or in an evangelical church, for example. Anywhere people spend most of their time working and socializing with people who they tend to agree with politically.
The bias exercised by reporters isn't usually a conscious one (although it's certainly gotten much more blatant in the last couple of years), but rather one where their echo chamber considers certain topics a certain way, considers certain sources they agree with as more reliable than ones they disagree with, thinks about stories in such a way to be sure and emphasize the parts which support their world view and suppress the parts which inconveniently don't, plus minimize the stories which don't support their "side" and emphasize the ones which do.
The bias at places like Google is similar. When they go to train their algorithms, they'll naturally start with trusted sources they personally trust, which will happen to be mostly left-leaning. When they get a complaint about "hate speech" at YouTube, they'll naturally be more inclined to suppress stuff they personally consider terrible (blacks suck!), while letting slide something similar they don't find as offensive (whites suck!).
Sure, as the video demonstrates, they have out and out efforts to get out the Hispanic vote, or to save Obama/Hillary from their latest technical incompetence crisis by donating support, but most of the impact isn't from that, it's from the more subtle type of bias which if you asked them about, they'd just say they were just doing what they "objectively" thought was right. It just happens that since they think about many things from a more left-wing perspective, that's what they perceive is right.
Maybe in Europe, but compared to the median voter in the United States? Naw....
Except there aren't any prominent right-wingers using this video to say Google executives/employees shouldn't have the right to say any of what they said in the video. Quite the opposite, they're happy to have them explain their left-wing views on camera. They're using the video to contradict the claim that executives and most staff at Google are unbiased when it comes to politics, when it's obvious with everything from free labor donations to Democratic campaigns to actual 90% of the cash donations they make that they lean very heavily to the left.
If Google's folks admitted they were mostly left-wing in how they run things at Google, then no one would care about the video.
So yes, Republicans support freedom of speech, including for business executives and other employees, they just object to their political opponents publicly claiming they aren't against them while privately holding a wake because the GOP won.
As it turns out, the 5 of us in my immediate geographic region have also recently voted to distribute 1 Billion dollars per month to each person.
Now all we need to do is do a little crowdfunding or get the government involved...
It is amazing this article and summary spends so much time talking about what two Democrats said, as opposed to what's happened and what the Republicans have done, which is more than Warner or Warren ever did. It's almost like to Techcrunch, Republicans don't exist except as targets to attack.
Funny how this very topically relevant information didn't make the "article", but the current Congress passed and Trump signed a bill taking effect 9/21 which according to the FTC includes provides for:
The article makes much about a letter Warren sent, but doesn't mention what the committee Chair, Hatch sent:
Programming doesn't require 150+ IQ. Maybe 115 for an average programmer. An average CS student is in the 120-125 range. I suggest addressing your question as a reply to the comment which said it requires 150+ IQ to find out why he thinks that.
From wikipedia:
and
and
Besides the Wechsler and Standford-Binet tests which I mentioned in my comment, which test are you claiming as being used so much more in the US to be the "standard" which also has your much lower scale?
The premise of this story is nonsense.
1. And as opposed to "nothing", the current Congress did pass and Trump did sign a bill which takes effect in 15 days which according to the FTC includes:
2. Equifax is still in court with the Feds, but they already "entered into a consent order with eight states that requires it to improve its data-protection practices in the wake of the huge data breach last year at the national credit-reporting agency."
Having a measured IQ >150, I can tell you with my excellent two-minute Googling skills there are approximately 300K in the U.S. if you're using the Stanford-Binet scale. For the Wechsler scale, it's more like 140K, which is still a lot of people. Heck, the Prometheus Society's cut-off for membership is 160+. I guess to you, they basically don't exist...
It doesn't surprise me that an Anon coward completely misrepresents what was cited.
Perhaps you're genuinely just unable to read a chart, but the media bias chart linked puts InfoWars under the "Most Extreme Right" category, labeled "Contains inaccurate/fabricated info" and "Nonsense damaging to public discourse".
Narrative fail:
1. I rarely hear directly from Trump saying anything and I see anything on Fox News about once every two years ago. Sorry to contradict your premises.
2. I asked for specific facts, an actual example of the guy's claim. He could produce no quotes even resembling what he claimed. He presented no relevant facts at all. Your resort to attacking the person simply asking for an example or two is quite revealing about your level of irrational obsession. How about you get someone to actually present some relevant facts to the claim which was made before accusing people of ignoring them?
A single machine-assisted human is currently more expensive than two cheap humans, but the economics of that can obviously change.
Machines-only is much less likely than less work done by humans and more of it done by machines in collaboration with humans. It's usually easier to leave a human to do the smaller parts which can't be automated yet than to automate the entire process.
Right, because Amazon owes all those specific welfare recipients a job and is required to pay them more than they're worth, regardless of how much their work contributes to the company's bottom line or not, right? That's you're false premise. Amazon isn't responsible for the life situation of the people who apply to work there, those people are.
The expected result of this bill would be for large employers to stop hiring welfare recipients at all, making their lives worse and significantly reducing their ability to live and to eventually get off welfare.
It's a really simple and well-understood principle. If you raise taxes on something (increase the cost of it), you will get less people buying that something.
If you massively raise taxes on employing poor people, then the expected result is that way less poor people will be employed. Apparently these idiots are unable to consider that not being able to get a job will help get them off welfare sooner. More likely, they prefer more people staying on welfare, as it increases their political base.
Don't worry, your initial instinct was right. Book deals like Bernie, Hillary, Obama get are essentially rewards/bribes for left-wing politicians. In Bernie's case, his books would have had to sell 5x as many copies as they actually did in order for him to have "earned" his giant advance from the publisher. For anyone else with that kind of advance/sales, that'd be a disaster for the publisher, but he has enough power/influence that it's written off as "supporting the right ideas" and a cost of their doing business.
The current U.S. health care system is about as far removed from free market capitalism as you can get without going full communist. How does that show anything about capitalism, except what happens when you remove free market incentives and substitute the government incentivizing third-party payers, massive amounts of regulations on both providing health care and paying for it, subsidies, literal government takeover of 2/3 of the market (via medicare/medicaid/VA, etc...), plus putting the government and a union (AMA) in charge of restricting supply?
Amazon and Walmart pay more people to work less hours in direct response to the incentive structure the government created for them. The response to this law (if it ever passed) would be the same, hiring less more expensive workers and automation/machinery to do the work and no longer employing welfare recipients. That's going to suck for the welfare recipients when they can only get a job at companies with less than 500 employees, because it costs too much to employ them at a larger company.
Maybe Bernie can propose a law repealing the laws of gravity and perpetual motion next, so we can all have free energy and anti-gravity devices...
The obvious solution is to give/sell them to the people who use them and have guests who use them. Make ownership in the local road company part of the bundle of rights which normally transfer with property rights. Then the people who actually need/use the roads can determine how they want them managed and paid for.
Exactly. This law just leads to large companies no longer hiring the people who need basic low-end jobs the most, the poor who get welfare benefits. Instead of two $15-16/hour workers, they'll hire one $2-30/hour worker and a machine to help them do their job. Right now having more lower paid workers is more cost effective, but this law would shift that balance and put them out of work instead. And then Bernie will blame "the corporations" for the expected results of the policies he proposed.
As a result, if you get welfare, you'll basically only be able to get a job at a company with less than 500 workers, because they'll have to pay you way less than a large company would, similar to the situation in France which (economically inefficiently, costing everyone wealth and standard of living) has way more small businesses than the U.S. does, almost all right at the 50 employee limit where their super employee bureaucracy kicks in.
Fortunately, this proposed law is merely a political stunt and has zero chance of passing in the near future.
You don't need the end user to have root access, you just need to have an update process running which can acquire root access, or at least access to the files which need to be updated.
So you give each appliance a private/public keypair and the public key of your update server. The process which has access to update would then only accept encrypted updates both designated for that appliance's specific key and signed using the update server's private key. Mutual authentication.
You can do that online via a TLS session, or offline using USB sticks or whatever. It's easy enough to automate either process, although the USB version would require someone to physically plug something in.
Another way to increase the security of the process is to require a reboot before any system files can actually be updated. It's more disruptive, but presumably if you have any sort of proper monitoring setup, an unplanned reboot shouldn't be missed.
None of those issues were "solved" by NN.
Regulatory compliance comes at a cost. Whether or not you're going to do anything which would be bad for your customers (who are the people you're having to convince to pay you for your services), you're still required to do all the paperwork and comply with all the whims of the regulators.
Also, if you're pointing at Portugal, that just shows you're getting your news from somewhere you should start ignoring.
No, the people who pay for 2 GB of wireless data, then don't have to count most of their video streaming against that cap.
It'll be interesting to watch a national wireless company offer two versions of their plans, the "normal" plan, and then the "California" plan, which would be the normal plan with the same cost and bandwidth usage, but without any zero rating for video.
I suspect some California customers would complain about that.