...and that's precisely how politicians have been so successful at stealing as much as they have. All they have to say is, "for the kids!" and everyone just melts. Of course, the fact that we're still trying to solve the same problems "for the kids" that politicians keep fucking up is never mentioned.
I'm sad that politicians keep screwing over the younger generations, but I refuse to be held culpable after handing over 15g+ in state taxes alone last year. My unwillingness to buy into their bullshit is not the reason kids are going without.
This idea that everyone should pay nothing in taxes is why we can't have good things
Except I pay more in taxes than even last year and I still don't have nice things. Roads are shit, PD/FD response times are worse than ever, teachers don't have the materials they need.
So where's that money going? It's not going to infrastructure or support. This has been the trend for the past decade, probably longer. So enough's enough; they can make do with what they have and go fuck themselves if they want to whine about not having enough.
( I liked your joke about how the rich will pay their fair share. I'll giggle about that one for a while, especially since the rich are usually the ones making the laws. )
Fortunately my days of aspiring to be a Jedi are long behind me.
The fact is politicians are simply unable to act in a trustworthy manner, and will subvert whatever proposal in order to further their own ends. They take thousands of dollars from me every year; I can not and will not vote for them to take more when I know damn well 50+% of what they get from me is pissed away.
If more people treated government with the suspicion and hostility I do ( ie: what they deserve ), we'd be in a much better place.
In part, because our tax money ( and a percentage of lottery winnings ) are supposed to go to the schools.
But of course politicians get their grimy little hands on a budget, and it all goes to shit. This is in part why I
A) Almost always vote against the incumbent B) *ALWAYS* *ALWAYS* *ALWAYS* vote against tax increases.
They have enough of my cash. If they can't pay for basic services with the stacks of green they pull out of my ass, that's they're fuck up not mine, and I won't fund any further idiocy.
Cuts years off the apprenticeship, but adds decades to a student loan.
Highschool students today need to be taught how to do cost analysis, so when it comes time to pay for college they understand what they're signing up for.
I've been kinda confused that everyone is so angry at Facebook, while MS has been given a free pass.
Google makes sense to me; they've always been known to profile you so as to effectively sell you stuff. Free service, so you had to have known what was going on ( same goes for facebook mind you ).
But MS; they force 10 down everyone's throats with telemetry and who knows what other data being collected. Of the three, MS's data collection policies are the most opaque; you can't even find out what they know about you. And that's for a product they charge people for!
Yet no one seems to care. I'm left with the inescapable conclusion that outrage at Facebook is nothing more than an extension of (D)s throwing a fit because Trump got elected.
Instead of muting, how about blocking even the downloading of media content by default? I can't believe how long it's taking to get there, but how useful a feature that would be for those of us that are sometimes forced to work on metered connections.
Apparently you can't think this far. It's not that hard, really. In other words, I rarely agree with Trump, but firing you was one of his more sensible moves. We don't need ignorant people who are unfit for their job in critical positions.
Thank god we don't any of those kinds of people left...in the government...
How is collecting data on non-users helpful in preventing reverse searches? It would seem to me that by not having that data non-users are best protected from searches?
I'd like some browser maker, any really, to come up with a browser profile which allows for use of the web in a metered connection. There are times when all i have access to is my mobile hotspot, and I pay per gig, so I'd really like to be able to flip a switch and have things like the disabling of multi-media downloads and pictures over Xkb.
I'm undecided how I feel about it, actually. I thought Obama's use was innovative, which would make Trump's use derivative. Effective though, so I can't fault either campaign in it's use.
Am I uncomfortable about privacy implications? No more so than I am about this life-leash we all carry around in our pockets that knows virtually everything about us.
What I know I don't like is how everyone is making a big deal about Trump being a horrible person for doing what Obama did 4 years earlier and being celebrated for.
I kinda got the same impression from OP, but perhaps there's something here ( never mind the delivery of the message ); the method of acquisition of the data is important, not necessarily the acquisition of the data itself, nor how said data was used?
Still seems somewhat hypocritical given how this is being portrayed by the media.
I haven't really gotten a clear answer on this, and I realize I'm asking a political question on slashdot so I probably won't get one, but yet I remain hopeful.
What's the difference between what Trump's team did and what Obama did in 2012? How is what Trump did worse?
But rather than going to the Feds to try and scuttle the deal through a long and uncertain process, Intel is rumored to be "working with advisors" (in plainer English, the company's Investment Bankers) on a countermove: acquire Broadcom.
Is that what we're hoping for now? Or is it simply that we expect that to happen and are shocked when it doesn't?
Anyone else amused that the article conflates SF with the entirety of CA? News flash, folks: SF, LA and SD could very well be their own distinct state, with everyone else making up a very very red state.
Personally, I'd love to see that. Give them what they want; their own state. Their own echo chamber to do with as they please.
It'd be even more amusing than some random dumbass conflating SF with the entire state of CA.
Slashdot Mirror
No, the correct response is to stop giving them money every time they use the "think of the children" line.
They're getting plenty of money, they don't need anymore. Now they can figure out how to keep their own house in order.
...and that's precisely how politicians have been so successful at stealing as much as they have. All they have to say is, "for the kids!" and everyone just melts. Of course, the fact that we're still trying to solve the same problems "for the kids" that politicians keep fucking up is never mentioned.
I'm sad that politicians keep screwing over the younger generations, but I refuse to be held culpable after handing over 15g+ in state taxes alone last year. My unwillingness to buy into their bullshit is not the reason kids are going without.
This idea that everyone should pay nothing in taxes is why we can't have good things
Except I pay more in taxes than even last year and I still don't have nice things. Roads are shit, PD/FD response times are worse than ever, teachers don't have the materials they need.
So where's that money going? It's not going to infrastructure or support. This has been the trend for the past decade, probably longer. So enough's enough; they can make do with what they have and go fuck themselves if they want to whine about not having enough.
( I liked your joke about how the rich will pay their fair share. I'll giggle about that one for a while, especially since the rich are usually the ones making the laws. )
Fortunately my days of aspiring to be a Jedi are long behind me.
The fact is politicians are simply unable to act in a trustworthy manner, and will subvert whatever proposal in order to further their own ends. They take thousands of dollars from me every year; I can not and will not vote for them to take more when I know damn well 50+% of what they get from me is pissed away.
If more people treated government with the suspicion and hostility I do ( ie: what they deserve ), we'd be in a much better place.
In part, because our tax money ( and a percentage of lottery winnings ) are supposed to go to the schools.
But of course politicians get their grimy little hands on a budget, and it all goes to shit. This is in part why I
A) Almost always vote against the incumbent
B) *ALWAYS* *ALWAYS* *ALWAYS* vote against tax increases.
They have enough of my cash. If they can't pay for basic services with the stacks of green they pull out of my ass, that's they're fuck up not mine, and I won't fund any further idiocy.
Cuts years off the apprenticeship, but adds decades to a student loan.
Highschool students today need to be taught how to do cost analysis, so when it comes time to pay for college they understand what they're signing up for.
I've been kinda confused that everyone is so angry at Facebook, while MS has been given a free pass.
Google makes sense to me; they've always been known to profile you so as to effectively sell you stuff. Free service, so you had to have known what was going on ( same goes for facebook mind you ).
But MS; they force 10 down everyone's throats with telemetry and who knows what other data being collected. Of the three, MS's data collection policies are the most opaque; you can't even find out what they know about you. And that's for a product they charge people for!
Yet no one seems to care. I'm left with the inescapable conclusion that outrage at Facebook is nothing more than an extension of (D)s throwing a fit because Trump got elected.
This is why the world needs more assholes.
We've become this faux-nice society and have thrown away the entire concept of counter-culture as a necessary ingredient to a healthy society.
Be the hero this country needs; be an asshole today!
( I'm not sure if I'm joking or not )
Instead of muting, how about blocking even the downloading of media content by default? I can't believe how long it's taking to get there, but how useful a feature that would be for those of us that are sometimes forced to work on metered connections.
Why not just audit https://xmpp.org/ and call it good?
Apparently you can't think this far. It's not that hard, really. In other words, I rarely agree with Trump, but firing you was one of his more sensible moves. We don't need ignorant people who are unfit for their job in critical positions.
Thank god we don't any of those kinds of people left...in the government...
How is collecting data on non-users helpful in preventing reverse searches? It would seem to me that by not having that data non-users are best protected from searches?
An article about what's not happening this year, and no real data on when something might happen?
Slow news day, folks?
It's worth pointing out that Mcafee, a supposed "security company" who no competent security professional would rely upon, said this.
It does explain a lot, now that I think of it.
He's just trying to connect everyone in the world out of the goodness of his heart, is he? His motives are purely altruistic, right?
So why isn't facebook a non-profit then?
I'd like some browser maker, any really, to come up with a browser profile which allows for use of the web in a metered connection. There are times when all i have access to is my mobile hotspot, and I pay per gig, so I'd really like to be able to flip a switch and have things like the disabling of multi-media downloads and pictures over Xkb.
I'm undecided how I feel about it, actually. I thought Obama's use was innovative, which would make Trump's use derivative. Effective though, so I can't fault either campaign in it's use.
Am I uncomfortable about privacy implications? No more so than I am about this life-leash we all carry around in our pockets that knows virtually everything about us.
What I know I don't like is how everyone is making a big deal about Trump being a horrible person for doing what Obama did 4 years earlier and being celebrated for.
I kinda got the same impression from OP, but perhaps there's something here ( never mind the delivery of the message ); the method of acquisition of the data is important, not necessarily the acquisition of the data itself, nor how said data was used?
Still seems somewhat hypocritical given how this is being portrayed by the media.
I haven't really gotten a clear answer on this, and I realize I'm asking a political question on slashdot so I probably won't get one, but yet I remain hopeful.
What's the difference between what Trump's team did and what Obama did in 2012? How is what Trump did worse?
I wonder if they offer gift packages.
But rather than going to the Feds to try and scuttle the deal through a long and uncertain process, Intel is rumored to be "working with advisors" (in plainer English, the company's Investment Bankers) on a countermove: acquire Broadcom.
Is that what we're hoping for now? Or is it simply that we expect that to happen and are shocked when it doesn't?
You're projecting. I never said the democrats would be better, in fact I never said anything about political parties at all.
Politicians are horrible people, no matter their supposed affiliation.
I guess it's no longer "corrupt", it's "traditional", which is fair if we're talking politics. Corruption is pretty traditional.
Anyone else amused that the article conflates SF with the entirety of CA? News flash, folks: SF, LA and SD could very well be their own distinct state, with everyone else making up a very very red state.
Personally, I'd love to see that. Give them what they want; their own state. Their own echo chamber to do with as they please.
It'd be even more amusing than some random dumbass conflating SF with the entire state of CA.
Facebook, known paragon of personal privacy, tracking you in a vpn?
Seriously, what dumbass was shocked by this? I would expect the only reason to use a facebook branded VPN would be so your information is collected.