If it makes people more cautious, maybe that's a good thing? Maybe that's what they should have been doing the entire time?
If the industry truly has something to offer, then it's really just a matter of time before it comes to fruition. If not, then the caution will save people headache.
Science is challenging that. There really are "born losers".
That's not my take. My take is that everyone has their own "challenges". My personal demons are stress eating ( drinking ), and as a result I'm a bit of a porker. I don't blame my genetics for that. I don't blame my employer for that, nor do I blame my family for it. *I* choose to eat and drink when I really shouldn't. I choose to stay up later than I should ( for some fucking peace and quiet. Just 30 minutes of it ). That's me. Were my physique a bigger priority for me, then I'd treat it as such.
I am repulsed by the idea that we are not capable of self control, of discipline.
I would dearly *love* to have my boss's backing to order blockchain kit and get it installed for several pilot projects.......the primary ( and only ) one being to mine ME bitcoins. But you know, we'd have blockchain technology!
The machine stores the vote and produces a scantron-like receipt which the voter then turns in at the registration desk. This receipt is easy to read, meaning a voter can have confidence that they really voted as they intended.
Then these paper receipts are scanned by a low-tech machine which tallies the votes, while the voting machine/network itself tallies it's votes, and they are compared. The votes from the machines themselves are considered "fuzzy", while the paper scantron-ballot is considered the primary source.
There are a lot of tricks you can do with the scantrons to ensure integrity in the process as well.
Greed is what what drives us to make sure the water is clean Hu? Greed makes you sell water that is not clean... so you get the money and you don't have to care about costs.
...and how long do you think you could keep that up? Someone lacking the ability to think things though might engage in that nonsense, but they'd only do so in the extremely short term and then? They'd have negative pressure they'd need to resolve ( probably by leaving the area or otherwise avoiding retribution ). That's not greed, that's stupidity.
Society is a product of greed; we all bind together fulfilling specific tasks so individually we have more leisure time than were we on our own.
Greed is a defining characteristic of our species. It's what drove us out of the trees, it's what spurred us forward technologically. Greed is why we plant crops, far more than we could ever eat, or that our family could consume. Greed is what what drives us to make sure the water is clean and the wastes are properly organized. It's why you can sit on a computer/phone somewhere and imply that greed is the problem.
Greed isn't the problem. Indeed, it could be said to the only good thing about our species.
What, then, is the problem? Intelligence, or rather greed without intelligence. It's the locusts that devour all the grain with no thought about tomorrow. It's the backstabbing of a friend for their share with no regard of the consequences. It's not even a lack of intelligence, but a lack of forethought. That's the real enemy, and that's really what you should be railing against.
I merely meant that in this rare instance, I don't advocate for a free market solution, but rather more government involvement ( as previously specified ).
Regardless, allowing municipalities to create their own infrastructure would encourage competition and render the "Net Neutrality" debate largely moot; there would be more ISPs to choose from and cities could rule that their infrastructure is only usable by those who follow NN ideals....assuming, of course, the idea would be to merely provide the infrastructure and not the internet connectivity, reserving that for companies to come in and provide.
This is one of those areas where I advocate for more government involvement. Allow cities/counties to build out their own local infrastructure, and allow regional ISPs to then piggyback on it ( for a maintenance fee ) and provide services.
Internet access ranks up there with utilities anymore, so let's start treating it as such.
I am a fan of small work environments. There are downsides, certainly, but overall I prefer the one on one interaction and the ability to really make a difference.
However, then 2008 hit and my small company job was under threat from budget cuts. Being a single parent I had to find more stable employment, so I took a stable job at a corporation.
Jesus...I always suspected Dilbert cartoons were, if anything, understating the situation, but to see it first hand was discouraging. I became so disillusioned with my field and those within it. Over 300 people in the IT division and only a handful doing any actual work; everyone else was dead weight ( at best ).
Stuck it out for 10 months, basically the amount of time it took me to find a small job ( far better pay and benefits ). Gave them the finger on the way out the door in the form of a very politically correct resignation letter.
...perhaps if city planners paid more attention to mass transit this wouldn't be an issue. In most cities I've visited, mass transit charges quite the time premium if you want to get anywhere.
Mobile devices, cell phones specifically, are horrible at content creation. It really comes down to input methods; there's nothing like the mouse and keyboard, or even stylus, for creating content. Touch is something we "make do" with, but you'll notice that we don't use touch monitors on desktops even though they've been available for decades. This despite MS's best attempts to shove them down our throats with windows 8, btw ( and the shills then were out in force! ).
Mobile devices are decent at consuming content, which you put your finger on. Sure, they aren't as good as desktops, but they're passable, and have the convenience factor ( which is huge ).
Those are the different usage profiles I was talking about.
They still don't get it, which is frankly quite the feat.
We don't want mobiles-like desktops. We don't want desktop-like mobiles. We want mobiles that are mobiles, and desktops that are desktops. They're two distinctly different devices, and should be treated as such.
Any law which has a deadline so far in advance that no one who votes on it will be around to see it come to fruition is, pretty much by definition, "feel good legislation". ie: horseshit.
Even if their numbers were true, it wouldn't change the fact that government mandated backdoors to encryption is a remarkably stupid and short sighted concept.
Hell, all investigations could grind to a halt tomorrow because of encryption, and it wouldn't change that equation. The quantity is irrelevant.
I know everyone likes to crack jokes about "we will make it up on volume" but it is rooted in sound practice.
The joke is in managers taking a "sound practice" and, through complete ignorance of what makes it a sound practice, fucks it up. The joke is how frequently that happens, and how often it could have been avoided by someone with more than two neurons to rub together ( ie: anyone, apparently, but the leaders of the company in question ).
I'm a "cord cutter", in a sense, but I have video service through comcast as well. Why? Because it's cheaper; it's cheaper for me to sign up for the video/internet package than for straight internet ( by a couple bucks ).
I've never plugged in the cable box; it still sits in the unopened box they shipped it to me in.
Given their pricing schedules, I doubt I'm the only one with this arrangement.
Slashdot Mirror
Anyone who knowingly and willingly buys Oracle gets what they deserve.
No organization is more deserving of working with Oracle than the government.
If it makes people more cautious, maybe that's a good thing? Maybe that's what they should have been doing the entire time?
If the industry truly has something to offer, then it's really just a matter of time before it comes to fruition. If not, then the caution will save people headache.
Science is challenging that. There really are "born losers".
That's not my take. My take is that everyone has their own "challenges". My personal demons are stress eating ( drinking ), and as a result I'm a bit of a porker. I don't blame my genetics for that. I don't blame my employer for that, nor do I blame my family for it. *I* choose to eat and drink when I really shouldn't. I choose to stay up later than I should ( for some fucking peace and quiet. Just 30 minutes of it ). That's me. Were my physique a bigger priority for me, then I'd treat it as such.
I am repulsed by the idea that we are not capable of self control, of discipline.
What's so special about hackers targeting valuable data? Can you imagine being alerted everytime that happens?
Or is it that they are so proud they protected against this one that they want a pat on the back?
I would dearly *love* to have my boss's backing to order blockchain kit and get it installed for several pilot projects.... ...the primary ( and only ) one being to mine ME bitcoins. But you know, we'd have blockchain technology!
https://xkcd.com/2030/
The machine stores the vote and produces a scantron-like receipt which the voter then turns in at the registration desk. This receipt is easy to read, meaning a voter can have confidence that they really voted as they intended.
Then these paper receipts are scanned by a low-tech machine which tallies the votes, while the voting machine/network itself tallies it's votes, and they are compared. The votes from the machines themselves are considered "fuzzy", while the paper scantron-ballot is considered the primary source.
There are a lot of tricks you can do with the scantrons to ensure integrity in the process as well.
Greed is what what drives us to make sure the water is clean ... so you get the money and you don't have to care about costs.
Hu? Greed makes you sell water that is not clean
...and how long do you think you could keep that up? Someone lacking the ability to think things though might engage in that nonsense, but they'd only do so in the extremely short term and then? They'd have negative pressure they'd need to resolve ( probably by leaving the area or otherwise avoiding retribution ). That's not greed, that's stupidity.
Society is a product of greed; we all bind together fulfilling specific tasks so individually we have more leisure time than were we on our own.
Greed is a defining characteristic of our species. It's what drove us out of the trees, it's what spurred us forward technologically. Greed is why we plant crops, far more than we could ever eat, or that our family could consume. Greed is what what drives us to make sure the water is clean and the wastes are properly organized. It's why you can sit on a computer/phone somewhere and imply that greed is the problem.
Greed isn't the problem. Indeed, it could be said to the only good thing about our species.
What, then, is the problem? Intelligence, or rather greed without intelligence. It's the locusts that devour all the grain with no thought about tomorrow. It's the backstabbing of a friend for their share with no regard of the consequences. It's not even a lack of intelligence, but a lack of forethought. That's the real enemy, and that's really what you should be railing against.
Uh, I don't?
I merely meant that in this rare instance, I don't advocate for a free market solution, but rather more government involvement ( as previously specified ).
Regardless, allowing municipalities to create their own infrastructure would encourage competition and render the "Net Neutrality" debate largely moot; there would be more ISPs to choose from and cities could rule that their infrastructure is only usable by those who follow NN ideals. ...assuming, of course, the idea would be to merely provide the infrastructure and not the internet connectivity, reserving that for companies to come in and provide.
This is one of those areas where I advocate for more government involvement. Allow cities/counties to build out their own local infrastructure, and allow regional ISPs to then piggyback on it ( for a maintenance fee ) and provide services.
Internet access ranks up there with utilities anymore, so let's start treating it as such.
I am a fan of small work environments. There are downsides, certainly, but overall I prefer the one on one interaction and the ability to really make a difference.
However, then 2008 hit and my small company job was under threat from budget cuts. Being a single parent I had to find more stable employment, so I took a stable job at a corporation.
Jesus...I always suspected Dilbert cartoons were, if anything, understating the situation, but to see it first hand was discouraging. I became so disillusioned with my field and those within it. Over 300 people in the IT division and only a handful doing any actual work; everyone else was dead weight ( at best ).
Stuck it out for 10 months, basically the amount of time it took me to find a small job ( far better pay and benefits ). Gave them the finger on the way out the door in the form of a very politically correct resignation letter.
...perhaps if city planners paid more attention to mass transit this wouldn't be an issue. In most cities I've visited, mass transit charges quite the time premium if you want to get anywhere.
I mean, didn't we do this to criminals ( and "insane" ) back in the early 1900s?
You assumed my position. Allow me to explain;
Mobile devices, cell phones specifically, are horrible at content creation. It really comes down to input methods; there's nothing like the mouse and keyboard, or even stylus, for creating content. Touch is something we "make do" with, but you'll notice that we don't use touch monitors on desktops even though they've been available for decades. This despite MS's best attempts to shove them down our throats with windows 8, btw ( and the shills then were out in force! ).
Mobile devices are decent at consuming content, which you put your finger on. Sure, they aren't as good as desktops, but they're passable, and have the convenience factor ( which is huge ).
Those are the different usage profiles I was talking about.
They still don't get it, which is frankly quite the feat.
We don't want mobiles-like desktops. We don't want desktop-like mobiles. We want mobiles that are mobiles, and desktops that are desktops. They're two distinctly different devices, and should be treated as such.
Anything more than one, sparingly used, is the sign of a weak mind.
Forgive me, but if Demore's essay really had such an effect, doesn't that prove him right?
Can we work on eliminating shoppers from the stores? They're the real problems.
Why?
I get a kick out of space stuff, but what's the return on investment? Could we realize a better return per dollar by spending it on other areas?
Any law which has a deadline so far in advance that no one who votes on it will be around to see it come to fruition is, pretty much by definition, "feel good legislation". ie: horseshit.
Even if their numbers were true, it wouldn't change the fact that government mandated backdoors to encryption is a remarkably stupid and short sighted concept.
Hell, all investigations could grind to a halt tomorrow because of encryption, and it wouldn't change that equation. The quantity is irrelevant.
I know everyone likes to crack jokes about "we will make it up on volume" but it is rooted in sound practice.
The joke is in managers taking a "sound practice" and, through complete ignorance of what makes it a sound practice, fucks it up. The joke is how frequently that happens, and how often it could have been avoided by someone with more than two neurons to rub together ( ie: anyone, apparently, but the leaders of the company in question ).
I'm a "cord cutter", in a sense, but I have video service through comcast as well. Why? Because it's cheaper; it's cheaper for me to sign up for the video/internet package than for straight internet ( by a couple bucks ).
I've never plugged in the cable box; it still sits in the unopened box they shipped it to me in.
Given their pricing schedules, I doubt I'm the only one with this arrangement.