I suspect he's talking just about conceptual education. Permutations, combinations, explanation of distributions by histograms and heat graphs.
If you ever took HS Physics and compared it to AP Physics, I suspect that's what he's driving at. HS Physics teaches F=ma, it teaches some basic 2D mechanics calculations. It doesn't really explain the relationship between acceleration, velocity and position rigorously.
Basic high school statistics has value. But I still think Calculus has more value.
Why would someone let your employer monitor YOUR iphone?
If you get email and calendar (and other things) from your owrk on your iPhone, then you have agreed to let them do it. If you don't do those things, then you really should not have to let them do this.
Today, people who don't own a car and/or don't want to drive just take a taxi or Uber. If they buy a self-driving car instead, how does that lead to more trips and more pollution?
Maybe we have cars for our kids now. Certainly mine would be in more after-school programs, since now we have a way of getting them there. Or maybe going an hour away to some otherwise inconvenient shopping center doesn't sound so horrible so we just go hop in our car, plug in our laptops and tune out for an hour. Certainly I would resent trips to Houston less (I live in Austin, it's 3-4 hours on a horrible road with lots of traffic lights that exists precisely as a combination of speed traps and local commerce traps).
I'm still not sure that this future is anywhere soon. What other changes may occur between now and then that alleviate this concern are hard to predict.
More or less the issue there. It's possible to fight the government in America and win, and even if you lose you frequently lose little provided you do so in a legal way (and we have legal ways). But for a foreign company to fight the government in China? Forget it.
The irony is that citizens routinely attack the police in China, over silly shit like parking tickets and traffic violations, often to no reprisal. Attacking a cop in the US is suicidal, even if (perhaps especially if) he was out of line and you were defending yourself. We even call it "suicide by cop".
She had no problems there, she drank the kool-aid willingly and my parents certainly did not force her (in fact tried to direct her elsewhere). But even she noticed how difficult it was not having been raised from birth in that...culture...for lack of better words. We were in fact raised baptist, but we had lived in many large cities in the country and had a somewhat larger perspective of the world.
I really don't think you'd want to go there and just play ball. That particular school is maybe not quite the academic pillar that a few other religious schools are, but I'd still think carefully about merely agreeing to abide in any of them. There are almost always better options, and by bringing your money to them you encourage them.
willing to enroll students of any faith/non-faith who are will to abide by the conduct codes
The code of conduct is misleading, for serious students they're usually not that onerous, just focus on your studies and you probably will never have disciplinary issues. But you can't live some place for 4+ years and be a castle, particularly not with modern group-based education practices. My sister went to Liberty, I don't know why, but I hear-tell if you are even mildly catholic, never mind some heathen non-Christian religion, you won't feel very welcome. I don't know how it is now that Falwell is gone, but I felt it clearly standing there during graduation. There's a secret handshake in the vocabulary they use, and the interpretations they use.
Unless there is some very compelling reason to be at a religious university, I think it's just not worth pretending to be someone you are not. There are plenty of good secular schools. In the US at least most of the secular schools offer both better educations and better reputations anyhow, with a few exceptions I can think of.
As usual, it has less to do with the specific example as it has to do with precedents that may not be desirable. It seems like if you release these two things "separately", then nothing is wrong. However by including this other binary with this problematic license as part of a single distribution you are "apparently" breaking the terms of the GPLv2 which requires the distribution be under GPLv2.
Hairs can be split about what a "distrubution" is. I can add ZFS to my own system and not be wrong. Why cannot a script add ZFS to my system for me during install? When does it become a "distribution", given that most of us don't install from optical media anymore, and frequently download bits and pieces as we need them for our system anyway. I'm trying to see the evil here that this narrowly avoids, but I don't yet...provided the terms of the various pieces of software are still met on their own.
First, your idea is too limited in scope. I will instead develop the IP in the child country, using offshore labor working directly for their western counterpart, and it will never be owned by me. This is actually not far from what is already going on in many companies. You are just adding a small stone in front of a river.
Second, you are trying to fix the problem, rather than fix the blame. That is a somewhat novel approach these days.
I think the problem here is NOT that it is illegal or legal. They are using tricks to evade the laws or go in areas where the laws haven't explicitly forbidden.
And those tricks and gaps, you think they were accidents? That Google, et. al are the only people who scrutinize tax laws?
I don't believe it for a second. That scrutiny is a prerequisite for the laws to have passed to begin with. The only people who cannot afford that scrutiny are the people being hurt. What has happened is that the general public, not just in France but everywhere, has caught on to this and is crying foul. And so we have this charade.
What is lost when people blame Google or Apple or Microsoft for these things is the message: your government sold you out. The outcome of this is, for the continued peace of France, is they're going to find something Google did wrong and Google is going to pay a nominal sum that sounds big to make it go away. The people will be happy that evil Google had to pay the piper but the laws won't change. Google will continue to pay less than what was intended, and a hundred other multinats will continue doing what they've always done.
If you can avoid it, you do not owe it. It is legal. It is not fraud, however unjust you may think it is.
If you owe it, try to hide it, and do not pay it, it's called "Tax Evasion". That's against the law, you don't pay back taxes you pay back taxes and go to jail.
If there is a dispute between what you think you owe, and what the government thinks you owe, it's called a lawsuit. If France wins, google owes back taxes (presumably with interest). If Google wins they still pay nothing.
France is asserting that Google does in fact owe money that Google does not believe it owes. It's a lawsuit. This distinction is incredibly important in many countries, as what these companies are doing is usually LEGAL. It is our own governments that are screwing up in tax law, and our governments that need to fix the problem. Of course the second you talk about "fixing" tax law, you end up with all sorts of barnyard noises in congress (in the US, but I imagine we don't have the market cornered on this). It's easier in this case to wage a war of public opinion (similar to FBI and keys to the city) than to actually try to get these sorts of laws changed against a hostile congress. But, as a people, we need to understand this: the government is complicit. The only reason these lawsuits even happen is that there is debate, there shouldn't be debate.
Also when you go do lawsuit stuff, you always exaggerate your claims. It's part of the game.
Some awareness that was apparently raised by the creation of this phone about conflict minerals in DR Congo. Awareness not apparently being which minerals, what wars, and what evidence there is that depriving DR Congo of business is going to help them. More importantly, by avoiding conflict minerals, what is being sacrificed to make this phone: you don't get something for nothing.
I know I know, I should just "know". But I don't, and I'm not going to google it and deal with all the hipster shit either, I want facts and primary sources that at least try not to sound like Sally Struthers. That's awareness. A phone is a phone.
In our age of cord cutting and DVRs, it's possible and even probable that your home network has far greater bandwidth needs than your ISP pipe. Around my house you will definitely find 4 streaming hi-def streams (one of which is 4k) at any time of the day. While this does not require 200Gbps, the day will come when 1Gbps won't cut it, and 802.11ac routers, in my experience, have some range issues already. So a way of wirelessly transmitting data fast is not useless even if your ISP sucks.
The harder part is wiring your house with fiber to feed the lamps, and then with maintaining line of site to lamps for the data, or even the fact that you have to have lights on to use the internet. I'm not sure I like this part yet.
Idiots Imbeciles Ignoramuses Iconoclasts Indigents Imps Indian givers Ingrates Inbreeds Iberis Ibex Ichneumons Ichthyocoprolites (A personal favorite)... (at least two dozen others)...
FBI doesn't want to ask for volunteers or buy a zero-day/jailbreak/exploit. It wants the power to compel a manufacturer's engineers to break their own security. "Break this phone or go to jail."
Which is why the summary is so wrong that it hurts the brain, and while I understand slashdot editors aren't exactly professionals, they should have the dignity to remove that comment. Bill Gates wants cooperation with big brother, McAfee wants policework. There's a huge difference between them.
Not always easy to know what the name of the freewifi service is in an airport you are not familiar with too. All you really know is you're not going to PAY for one, so it's either free or you're tethering. But which one is the free one?
It's not necessarily a good solution. They can produce some compliance cars that meet the letter of the agreement, that no one wants to buy, and it won't do any actual good.
If however VW wants to enter the electric car space anyway, this might let them retain the capital required for that investment and shrug off any shareholders (particularly those with oil interests).
Whatever happens to Apple here will impact everyone else
So assume that if they never jump in, they are already compromised.
But if they're going to jump in, they won't do it now. Let Apple deal with the PR issues (which won't be entirely in their favor, a lot of people are terrified of terrorists and would gladly give their house keys to the government). If Google and MS are going to jump in, and i agree they pretty much have to if they are not already compromised, it will be when this hits the courts.
Slashdot Mirror
I suspect he's talking just about conceptual education. Permutations, combinations, explanation of distributions by histograms and heat graphs.
If you ever took HS Physics and compared it to AP Physics, I suspect that's what he's driving at. HS Physics teaches F=ma, it teaches some basic 2D mechanics calculations. It doesn't really explain the relationship between acceleration, velocity and position rigorously.
Basic high school statistics has value. But I still think Calculus has more value.
I'd wait for DisplayPort 1.99999, "retina" 72" flatscreen or GTFO.
Uh... Only PortPorts can MOO, not appity ports, say the cows.
Why would someone let your employer monitor YOUR iphone?
If you get email and calendar (and other things) from your owrk on your iPhone, then you have agreed to let them do it. If you don't do those things, then you really should not have to let them do this.
Today, people who don't own a car and/or don't want to drive just take a taxi or Uber. If they buy a self-driving car instead, how does that lead to more trips and more pollution?
Maybe we have cars for our kids now. Certainly mine would be in more after-school programs, since now we have a way of getting them there. Or maybe going an hour away to some otherwise inconvenient shopping center doesn't sound so horrible so we just go hop in our car, plug in our laptops and tune out for an hour. Certainly I would resent trips to Houston less (I live in Austin, it's 3-4 hours on a horrible road with lots of traffic lights that exists precisely as a combination of speed traps and local commerce traps).
I'm still not sure that this future is anywhere soon. What other changes may occur between now and then that alleviate this concern are hard to predict.
If it exceeds my expected lifespan, it is "the distant future".
I eat a lot of red meat. Tuesday is the distant future.
More or less the issue there. It's possible to fight the government in America and win, and even if you lose you frequently lose little provided you do so in a legal way (and we have legal ways). But for a foreign company to fight the government in China? Forget it.
The irony is that citizens routinely attack the police in China, over silly shit like parking tickets and traffic violations, often to no reprisal. Attacking a cop in the US is suicidal, even if (perhaps especially if) he was out of line and you were defending yourself. We even call it "suicide by cop".
She had no problems there, she drank the kool-aid willingly and my parents certainly did not force her (in fact tried to direct her elsewhere). But even she noticed how difficult it was not having been raised from birth in that...culture...for lack of better words. We were in fact raised baptist, but we had lived in many large cities in the country and had a somewhat larger perspective of the world.
I really don't think you'd want to go there and just play ball. That particular school is maybe not quite the academic pillar that a few other religious schools are, but I'd still think carefully about merely agreeing to abide in any of them. There are almost always better options, and by bringing your money to them you encourage them.
Die harder
Rigor mortis will take care of that.
"He died as he lived: failing to call a doctor after it lasted more than 4 hours"
willing to enroll students of any faith/non-faith who are will to abide by the conduct codes
The code of conduct is misleading, for serious students they're usually not that onerous, just focus on your studies and you probably will never have disciplinary issues. But you can't live some place for 4+ years and be a castle, particularly not with modern group-based education practices. My sister went to Liberty, I don't know why, but I hear-tell if you are even mildly catholic, never mind some heathen non-Christian religion, you won't feel very welcome. I don't know how it is now that Falwell is gone, but I felt it clearly standing there during graduation. There's a secret handshake in the vocabulary they use, and the interpretations they use.
Unless there is some very compelling reason to be at a religious university, I think it's just not worth pretending to be someone you are not. There are plenty of good secular schools. In the US at least most of the secular schools offer both better educations and better reputations anyhow, with a few exceptions I can think of.
As usual, it has less to do with the specific example as it has to do with precedents that may not be desirable. It seems like if you release these two things "separately", then nothing is wrong. However by including this other binary with this problematic license as part of a single distribution you are "apparently" breaking the terms of the GPLv2 which requires the distribution be under GPLv2.
Hairs can be split about what a "distrubution" is. I can add ZFS to my own system and not be wrong. Why cannot a script add ZFS to my system for me during install? When does it become a "distribution", given that most of us don't install from optical media anymore, and frequently download bits and pieces as we need them for our system anyway. I'm trying to see the evil here that this narrowly avoids, but I don't yet...provided the terms of the various pieces of software are still met on their own.
I propose that if a patent company wants to...
First, your idea is too limited in scope. I will instead develop the IP in the child country, using offshore labor working directly for their western counterpart, and it will never be owned by me. This is actually not far from what is already going on in many companies. You are just adding a small stone in front of a river.
Second, you are trying to fix the problem, rather than fix the blame. That is a somewhat novel approach these days.
This is the price of "free" MS upgrades.
I actually had to pay full price for this.
I think the problem here is NOT that it is illegal or legal. They are using tricks to evade the laws or go in areas where the laws haven't explicitly forbidden.
And those tricks and gaps, you think they were accidents? That Google, et. al are the only people who scrutinize tax laws?
I don't believe it for a second. That scrutiny is a prerequisite for the laws to have passed to begin with. The only people who cannot afford that scrutiny are the people being hurt. What has happened is that the general public, not just in France but everywhere, has caught on to this and is crying foul. And so we have this charade.
What is lost when people blame Google or Apple or Microsoft for these things is the message: your government sold you out. The outcome of this is, for the continued peace of France, is they're going to find something Google did wrong and Google is going to pay a nominal sum that sounds big to make it go away. The people will be happy that evil Google had to pay the piper but the laws won't change. Google will continue to pay less than what was intended, and a hundred other multinats will continue doing what they've always done.
avoid .... owe ... legal fraud
If you can avoid it, you do not owe it. It is legal. It is not fraud, however unjust you may think it is.
If you owe it, try to hide it, and do not pay it, it's called "Tax Evasion". That's against the law, you don't pay back taxes you pay back taxes and go to jail.
If there is a dispute between what you think you owe, and what the government thinks you owe, it's called a lawsuit. If France wins, google owes back taxes (presumably with interest). If Google wins they still pay nothing.
France is asserting that Google does in fact owe money that Google does not believe it owes. It's a lawsuit. This distinction is incredibly important in many countries, as what these companies are doing is usually LEGAL. It is our own governments that are screwing up in tax law, and our governments that need to fix the problem. Of course the second you talk about "fixing" tax law, you end up with all sorts of barnyard noises in congress (in the US, but I imagine we don't have the market cornered on this). It's easier in this case to wage a war of public opinion (similar to FBI and keys to the city) than to actually try to get these sorts of laws changed against a hostile congress. But, as a people, we need to understand this: the government is complicit. The only reason these lawsuits even happen is that there is debate, there shouldn't be debate.
Also when you go do lawsuit stuff, you always exaggerate your claims. It's part of the game.
Some awareness that was apparently raised by the creation of this phone about conflict minerals in DR Congo. Awareness not apparently being which minerals, what wars, and what evidence there is that depriving DR Congo of business is going to help them. More importantly, by avoiding conflict minerals, what is being sacrificed to make this phone: you don't get something for nothing.
I know I know, I should just "know". But I don't, and I'm not going to google it and deal with all the hipster shit either, I want facts and primary sources that at least try not to sound like Sally Struthers. That's awareness. A phone is a phone.
Theoretically great, practically useless.
Practically dubious.
In our age of cord cutting and DVRs, it's possible and even probable that your home network has far greater bandwidth needs than your ISP pipe. Around my house you will definitely find 4 streaming hi-def streams (one of which is 4k) at any time of the day. While this does not require 200Gbps, the day will come when 1Gbps won't cut it, and 802.11ac routers, in my experience, have some range issues already. So a way of wirelessly transmitting data fast is not useless even if your ISP sucks.
The harder part is wiring your house with fiber to feed the lamps, and then with maintaining line of site to lamps for the data, or even the fact that you have to have lights on to use the internet. I'm not sure I like this part yet.
Really that one was at the bottom of my list:
Idiots ... (at least two dozen others) ...
Imbeciles
Ignoramuses
Iconoclasts
Indigents
Imps
Indian givers
Ingrates
Inbreeds
Iberis
Ibex
Ichneumons
Ichthyocoprolites (A personal favorite)
Investigation
Integrity
So that's 188 on the list so far...
Jennifer Lawrence couldn't keep her nudes locked down, but Uncle Sam totally can't get in to an iPhone.
FBI doesn't want to ask for volunteers or buy a zero-day/jailbreak/exploit. It wants the power to compel a manufacturer's engineers to break their own security. "Break this phone or go to jail."
Which is why the summary is so wrong that it hurts the brain, and while I understand slashdot editors aren't exactly professionals, they should have the dignity to remove that comment. Bill Gates wants cooperation with big brother, McAfee wants policework. There's a huge difference between them.
Not always easy to know what the name of the freewifi service is in an airport you are not familiar with too. All you really know is you're not going to PAY for one, so it's either free or you're tethering. But which one is the free one?
Agreed. Binge all night, sleep it off. Then take the morning after pill the next morning!
It's not necessarily a good solution. They can produce some compliance cars that meet the letter of the agreement, that no one wants to buy, and it won't do any actual good.
If however VW wants to enter the electric car space anyway, this might let them retain the capital required for that investment and shrug off any shareholders (particularly those with oil interests).
Whatever happens to Apple here will impact everyone else
So assume that if they never jump in, they are already compromised.
But if they're going to jump in, they won't do it now. Let Apple deal with the PR issues (which won't be entirely in their favor, a lot of people are terrified of terrorists and would gladly give their house keys to the government). If Google and MS are going to jump in, and i agree they pretty much have to if they are not already compromised, it will be when this hits the courts.
I can't even think of a way to check the gender of the merchant.
I can't even be sure of the species of some of them.