Verizon hasn't offered unlimited plans for years, so all relevant contract terms have expired.
If they can't kick them off because the plans are obsolete, how can they kick them off with a retroactive policy?
To be clear, Verizon could disconnect everyone on an "unlimited plan" if they wanted to. The original contracts are all expired.
Technically, they would only have to wait until the end of the customer's billing cycle---since these plans are prepaid, the customer has already paid for this month's service.
I see popcorn and lawsuits.
Then you're hallucinating. Because they absolutely can do this.
So? That doesn't change the fact that other users are still on the plan, and Verizon is still describing it as "unlimited" to them, which is false advertising.
Verizon's business is with the account holder. The other people may be receiving service, but the agreement is between VZW and the account holder.
Verizon hasn't sold "unlimited" plans for years. These people were on grandfathered plans.
Grandfathering isn't legally guaranteed, and Verizon can change their service offering at any time. But if they can change the service since there is no longer a contract, then the customer can cancel the service for the same reason.
Maybe Verizon deserves to have people stick it to them by using 100+ GB a month, but there is no law on Earth that gives everyone what they deserve.
Microsoft is dealing with a regulatory body that has issued them a warning. They don't need to "prove innocence". They need to demonstrate compliance with the law by the deadline.
It doesn't matter if they convince CNIL that their current regime is adequate or if they change the telemetry behavior on French installations.
Until CNIL imposes a penalty, they have every reason to be cooperative and accommodating.
It must be nice to live in a country where laws protect the privacy of citizens from corporate interests.
You need the same route and the same driving pattern for the comparison to be meaningful.
In an actual city, traffic comes and goes. A route may be unavailable for months due to construction. And real-world driving is inherently reactive since you have to deal with other drivers. There is no way to put each vehicle through the exact same trial.
Basically, it is impossible to have a controlled environment in a real city. But you can drive on testing grounds following a pattern with stops, starts, and turns that mimics city driving.
And you can take your well-controlled MPG rating and compare it to real-world reports under similar driving conditions.
The EPA does both of those things---rigorously controlled testing with comparative analysis to real-world data.
Private companies also test vehicles, and, e.g., Consumer Reports found that 90% of vehicles tested within +/-2 MPG of their EPA rating.
So does every startup company. Investors and loans are normal, even when the founder can invest significantly into the company.
His competitors got pretty much the same tax incentives. If Chevy decided to make an ugly electric car and then not sell it, well, maybe that explains why Tesla is making headway.
That is probably where the traditional manufacturers made a mistake. EVs are new tech in the public mind, which implies a degree of uncertainty and risk---exactly what your typical econobox buyer avoids whenever possible. Tesla went after buyers who are willing to buy something because it's new and shiny or because it makes a statement.
Tesla still has a monopoly on performance/luxury EVs. And if you can deliver the goods in that market, you can probably economize your design down for the masses.
Still, the late delivery of virtually every product and feature would make me shy away from preordering anything. I like what's happening, but the company is far from perfect.
Keep in mind that consumer editions cannot go below Basic telemetry. The default is Enhanced, which includes more than the list below.
From Microsoft directly (reformatted and edited for brevity since Slashdot hates multilevel lists):
Basic device data, including device attributes (such as camera resolution and display type)
Internet Explorer version
Battery attributes (such as capacity and type)
Networking attributes (such as number of network adapters, speed of network adapters, mobile operator network, and IMEI number)
Processor and memory attributes (such as number of cores, architecture, speed, memory size, and firmware)
Virtualization attribute, such as Second Level Address Translation (SLAT) support and guest operating system
Operating system attributes, such as Windows edition and virtualization state
Storage attributes, such as number of drives, type, and size
Connected User Experience and Telemetry component quality metrics, including % of uploaded events, dropped events, and the last upload time.
Quality-related information, such as the device characteristics of a Connected Standby device, the number of crashes or hangs, and application state change details (such as how much processor time and memory were used, and the total uptime for an app)
Compatibility data. Helps provide an understanding about which apps are installed on a device or virtual machine and identifies potential compatibility problems.
General app data and app data for Internet Explorer add-ons. Includes a list of apps that are installed on a native or virtualized instance of the OS and whether these apps function correctly after an upgrade, including the app name, publisher, version, and basic details about which files have been blocked from usage.
App usage data. Includes how an app is used, including how long an app is used for, when the app has focus, and when the app is started
System data, including the amount of memory, as well as information about the processor and BIOS.
Accessory device data. Includes a list of accessory devices, such as printers or external storage devices, that are connected to Windows PCs
Driver data. Includes specific driver usage that’s meant to help figure out whether apps and devices will function after upgrading to a new version of the operating system. This can help to determine blocking issues and then help Microsoft and our partners apply fixes and improvements.
Windows Store, including app downloads, installations, and updates. It also includes Windows Store launches, page views, suspend and resumes, and obtaining licenses.
The default setting also includes crash dumps and system events, although consumers can disable that if they know how.
That's what I was thinking. Why would a judge rebuke anyone for this?
The judge was most likely rebuking him for the illegally-recorded phone calls. Possibly other things as well, but definitely that.
Lying is not generally illegal, but in certain situations it may violate the law or professional ethics. Trying to violate attorney-client privilege may not be illegal (not a lawyer), but a judge isn't going to look kindly on the endeavor.
I doubt anyone expects a PI to get results without dissembling.
You do realize that (for a wide frequency band) the audio spectrum is a shared resource?
What an absolutely worthless comparison.
When you develop a network technology that can handle numerous transmitters on the same frequency---some of which are far more powerful than the one you're listening to---go ahead and let the rest of us know.
Until then, we'll continue to divvy up the spectrum so that things work in the real world.
I get that cryptonerds find it fascinating, but in the real world everyone is using AES unless they have legacy crap to support.
Some people may use Serpent or Twofish if they distrust AES, but the result is the same. "Decrypting" any real system with a custom key like that is just not going to happen.
This is a negotiation tactic. The deployment of new tech is inevitable---it's just a question of when.
As long as the government doesn't cave, there will be consumer demand eventually, and the first company to deploy 5G gets those customers. The rest will follow suit in time.
We have net neutrality rules because we know they'll be dickheads without them. Why would anyone take away those protections when they're act like even bigger dickheads right now?
It's rarely enough time to replace you, let alone give you any time to transition any worthwhile knowledge to them.
In my experience, there is usually a team responsible for a particular functional area. It isn't just some new hire coming in blind.
During my notice period, my team would pick up the tasks I normally performed. I documented anything I thought needed it and handed off assets/responsibilities in a reasonable fashion. Usually there were several questions a day, and I answered them (and added to the documentation).
It really depends on the job and the company.
A welder or janitor could simply perform the same job for two weeks to prevent a backlog of work; a programmer on a small/solo project might stop coding in favor of documenting procedures and design details that will help his replacement get up to speed quickly. Any technically-skilled worker in a team environment would probably do some knowledge transfer and hand over his responsibilities to the colleagues best suited for them.
no employer in an at-will state is going to say "Okay, we're firing you, but we're going to let you keep working here for two more weeks while you look for a new job"
Some employers offer severance pay, which is basically the same thing---minus the expectation of showing up every day.
A decent employer will offer severance for business-related terminations (facility closures, lost contracts, financial shortfalls, etc). The severance policies obviously exclude situations such as job abandonment and misconduct.
So how does the new firm know that you were "unprofessional" in the timing of your departure?
That's an easy one. They ask if you're eligible to be rehired.
If you've done something bad or pissed off your management, the answer will be "no".
Since the company isn't disclosing any personal information or making any allegations regarding your conduct, there is nothing they can be sued over.
This is a fairly standard practice in corporate HR.
If you worked for a large business, you could probably dream up a not-entirely-terrible explanation since you know they will not provide any other details. It will still be a mark against, but you can mitigate it quite a bit.
not running AV because some researcher are doing next-level shit is like not wearing your seatbelt because a sniper might get you
To extend your analogy, we are now driving at speeds that render the seatbelt inadequate. While it may still be wise to buckle up, we need a better seatbelt design, a supplementary measure, or a replacement.
Right now, we have IDS/IPS applications and ad/script blocking as reasonably good supplements. But even that isn't enough anymore---just as adding an air bag isn't enough to make a car safe at racetrack speeds.
There are suitable solutions for enterprise where the budget and administrative skills can support it, but there is really nothing for home users.
It is a huge liability to rely on virus definitions and heuristics engines. They are often too little, too late. The trend toward rapid development and advanced threats started about 15 years ago, and it has been making antimalware applications increasingly irrelevant.
Ad- and script-blocking helps, but those are targeted primarily at web browsing, and that is certainly not the only attack vector.
Whitelisting and mandatory access controls (e.g., SELinux) are the only truly effective measures, and they require a lot more work than antivirus. Antivirus is a simple 5-minute installation with automatic updates thereafter---and some even refuse to do that much. There is little hope that most home users will implement anything better.
There are adequate solutions, but they raise the bar in terms of the expertise, expense, and effort required. Even if a company addressed the "expense" issue by releasing a consumer-priced whitelisting application for Windows, there is no clear way to eliminate the other requirements.
In light of all this, I see things getting worse before they get better. It takes a lot of problems before home users pony up their time and money.
Someone has to innovate or offer quality products when the entrenched suppliers are mass-producing the same boring crap they produced last year.
Apple introduced the Newton a few years before PDAs took off.
Microsoft demoed a smartphone two years before that market took off.
Intel developed the ultrabook concept because laptop OEMs were complacent.
Microsoft made the Surface because the laptop OEMs were being cheap and producing crap for convertibles.
While I will continue to build my own PCs for the foreseeable future, I can still see a lot of places that would benefit from inexpensive-yet-durable AIO PCs. Education, basic users, and kiosks for starters.
Most power supplies run all 12V connections on a single output rail.
Whether it uses a 6-pin or 8-pin connector, the graphics card will draw power from the PSU in the exact same way.
Most of the time. It is possible that older PSUs have split 12V rails, which may cause problems. PSUs old enough to have split 12V lines will probably not have PCIe-compatible 6-pin and 8-pin connectors though. Those connectors were specifically designed for PCIe devices, so I would be very surprised if they are present on anything that old.
Still, even though it shouldn't be a problem anywhere, it would be nice if these companies could comply with the specifications. Especially when there is already a connector spec'd to handle that load.
Burned out PSUs instead of motherboards, here we come!
Exceedingly unlikely. The excess power draw through the motherboard was already being fed by the PSU.
Most PSUs have a single 12V rail that supplies all components in the system, including the motherboard.
As a result, the 12V rail is typically rated to supply most of the PSU's wattage. I would expect no issues unless the total system draw is near the PSU's capacity.
E.g., I have a 400W Seasonic PSU that can supply ~350W on the 12V line. I have an older GPU rated for 200W, and it has worked fine for years.
Swapping in the RX 480 with its 150-180W draw would cause no issues---especially after this driver fix. All power above the 75W limit for the PCIe slot will now be drawn from the ancillary power connector, as it should be. This is the same as previous cards, among them the 250-300W monstrosities marketed as Fury/Titan.
So you see no moral issues with the largest social media site with 1.60+ billion users
Nope. I opted out of Facebook a long time ago. Because I can do that, there is no moral issue.
When it comes to bias, Fox News is worse, and I do nothing aside from changing the channel.
Yes, that has worked well in the operating system arena with Microsoft throwing their whole weight against competitors.
There are alternatives. Good ones, too.
If enterprise organizations choose not to use these alternatives, then Microsoft will exist for a very long time regardless of what happens in the home and SOHO markets.
You could also legally call someone names on the street
To a point.
If the recipient opts out by attempting to end the interaction, the aggressor can usually be cited for disorderly conduct, assault, or harassment if he continues to follow and harangue the person.
it doesn't mean it's acceptable nor that the community should tolerate it
The law specifies what the community tolerates in the sense that people can freely engage in any legal behavior.
Whether another individual should accept the behavior is an entirely different matter, and there are always social and economic consequences privately.
In the case of Facebook, they lose users as a source of advertising revenue and data if they act inappropriately.
It sounds like Apple wants their 30% cut even though Spotify (and other apps) are multiplatform. And, in fact, users choose those apps/services because of their availability on multiple platforms.
To be fair, I think Apple should prorate its App Store cut based on the total platform footprint of the service.
E.g., if Spotify is on 4 platforms (iOS, MacOS, Windows, and Android), then Spotify pays 1/4 of the standard rate on subscriptions.
If this applied only to recurring subscription costs, it would have no effect on revenue from one-off app sales and in-app purchases.
Slashdot Mirror
What do the contracts say?
Verizon hasn't offered unlimited plans for years, so all relevant contract terms have expired.
If they can't kick them off because the plans are obsolete, how can they kick them off with a retroactive policy?
To be clear, Verizon could disconnect everyone on an "unlimited plan" if they wanted to. The original contracts are all expired.
Technically, they would only have to wait until the end of the customer's billing cycle---since these plans are prepaid, the customer has already paid for this month's service.
I see popcorn and lawsuits.
Then you're hallucinating. Because they absolutely can do this.
So? That doesn't change the fact that other users are still on the plan, and Verizon is still describing it as "unlimited" to them, which is false advertising.
Verizon's business is with the account holder. The other people may be receiving service, but the agreement is between VZW and the account holder.
Verizon hasn't sold "unlimited" plans for years. These people were on grandfathered plans.
Grandfathering isn't legally guaranteed, and Verizon can change their service offering at any time. But if they can change the service since there is no longer a contract, then the customer can cancel the service for the same reason.
Maybe Verizon deserves to have people stick it to them by using 100+ GB a month, but there is no law on Earth that gives everyone what they deserve.
Microsoft is dealing with a regulatory body that has issued them a warning. They don't need to "prove innocence". They need to demonstrate compliance with the law by the deadline.
It doesn't matter if they convince CNIL that their current regime is adequate or if they change the telemetry behavior on French installations.
Until CNIL imposes a penalty, they have every reason to be cooperative and accommodating.
It must be nice to live in a country where laws protect the privacy of citizens from corporate interests.
The Enterprise edition is sufficient for those cases.
Even if it were an issue, they could block the machines from communicating with Microsoft.
Updates can be distributed via WSUS, so there is no need for business workstations to connect to Microsoft servers at all.
Absolutely not.
You need the same route and the same driving pattern for the comparison to be meaningful.
In an actual city, traffic comes and goes. A route may be unavailable for months due to construction. And real-world driving is inherently reactive since you have to deal with other drivers. There is no way to put each vehicle through the exact same trial.
Basically, it is impossible to have a controlled environment in a real city. But you can drive on testing grounds following a pattern with stops, starts, and turns that mimics city driving.
And you can take your well-controlled MPG rating and compare it to real-world reports under similar driving conditions.
The EPA does both of those things---rigorously controlled testing with comparative analysis to real-world data.
Private companies also test vehicles, and, e.g., Consumer Reports found that 90% of vehicles tested within +/-2 MPG of their EPA rating.
But he is using other people's money, not his
So does every startup company. Investors and loans are normal, even when the founder can invest significantly into the company.
His competitors got pretty much the same tax incentives. If Chevy decided to make an ugly electric car and then not sell it, well, maybe that explains why Tesla is making headway.
That is probably where the traditional manufacturers made a mistake. EVs are new tech in the public mind, which implies a degree of uncertainty and risk---exactly what your typical econobox buyer avoids whenever possible. Tesla went after buyers who are willing to buy something because it's new and shiny or because it makes a statement.
Tesla still has a monopoly on performance/luxury EVs. And if you can deliver the goods in that market, you can probably economize your design down for the masses.
Still, the late delivery of virtually every product and feature would make me shy away from preordering anything. I like what's happening, but the company is far from perfect.
I have dual-booted my home desktop before. Worst case scenario, I have to manually tinker with the boot loader to get back to my original OS.
On a work or mobile device? No way.
My cell phone is my only phone, so I'm not risking the hassle. I could slap my SIM into a $10 special in an emergency, but I'd rather not.
And at work, I'm not getting paid to play with new shiny things---or if I am, there is a virtual lab for it.
Keep in mind that consumer editions cannot go below Basic telemetry. The default is Enhanced, which includes more than the list below.
From Microsoft directly (reformatted and edited for brevity since Slashdot hates multilevel lists):
The default setting also includes crash dumps and system events, although consumers can disable that if they know how.
Reference https://technet.microsoft.com/...
The military systems that matter have no connectivity to the public internet.
If internet-connected machines were a concern, the perimeter firewall could mitigate the issue entirely.
The DoD runs its own WSUS repositories, so their servers and workstations would have no need to connect to Microsoft anyway.
That's what I was thinking. Why would a judge rebuke anyone for this?
The judge was most likely rebuking him for the illegally-recorded phone calls. Possibly other things as well, but definitely that.
Lying is not generally illegal, but in certain situations it may violate the law or professional ethics. Trying to violate attorney-client privilege may not be illegal (not a lawyer), but a judge isn't going to look kindly on the endeavor.
I doubt anyone expects a PI to get results without dissembling.
You do realize that (for a wide frequency band) the audio spectrum is a shared resource?
What an absolutely worthless comparison.
When you develop a network technology that can handle numerous transmitters on the same frequency---some of which are far more powerful than the one you're listening to---go ahead and let the rest of us know.
Until then, we'll continue to divvy up the spectrum so that things work in the real world.
No one uses one-time pads.
I get that cryptonerds find it fascinating, but in the real world everyone is using AES unless they have legacy crap to support.
Some people may use Serpent or Twofish if they distrust AES, but the result is the same. "Decrypting" any real system with a custom key like that is just not going to happen.
If an established security researcher can't figure out what permissions an application is requesting, maybe Google needs to work on their UI.
On the other hand, maybe the guy is just an idiot.
I'm not into Pokemon, so I don't know exactly what it displays during installation.
You can buy gaming PCs and laptops from major OEMs now.
It's only too hard if you have problems using a credit card.
Oh, building your own? Yeah, that sounds like something an enthusiast would do. I guess maybe you need to learn a little if you want to do that.
This is a negotiation tactic. The deployment of new tech is inevitable---it's just a question of when.
As long as the government doesn't cave, there will be consumer demand eventually, and the first company to deploy 5G gets those customers. The rest will follow suit in time.
We have net neutrality rules because we know they'll be dickheads without them. Why would anyone take away those protections when they're act like even bigger dickheads right now?
It's rarely enough time to replace you, let alone give you any time to transition any worthwhile knowledge to them.
In my experience, there is usually a team responsible for a particular functional area. It isn't just some new hire coming in blind.
During my notice period, my team would pick up the tasks I normally performed. I documented anything I thought needed it and handed off assets/responsibilities in a reasonable fashion. Usually there were several questions a day, and I answered them (and added to the documentation).
It really depends on the job and the company.
A welder or janitor could simply perform the same job for two weeks to prevent a backlog of work; a programmer on a small/solo project might stop coding in favor of documenting procedures and design details that will help his replacement get up to speed quickly. Any technically-skilled worker in a team environment would probably do some knowledge transfer and hand over his responsibilities to the colleagues best suited for them.
no employer in an at-will state is going to say "Okay, we're firing you, but we're going to let you keep working here for two more weeks while you look for a new job"
Some employers offer severance pay, which is basically the same thing---minus the expectation of showing up every day.
A decent employer will offer severance for business-related terminations (facility closures, lost contracts, financial shortfalls, etc). The severance policies obviously exclude situations such as job abandonment and misconduct.
So how does the new firm know that you were "unprofessional" in the timing of your departure?
That's an easy one. They ask if you're eligible to be rehired.
If you've done something bad or pissed off your management, the answer will be "no".
Since the company isn't disclosing any personal information or making any allegations regarding your conduct, there is nothing they can be sued over.
This is a fairly standard practice in corporate HR.
If you worked for a large business, you could probably dream up a not-entirely-terrible explanation since you know they will not provide any other details. It will still be a mark against, but you can mitigate it quite a bit.
not running AV because some researcher are doing next-level shit is like not wearing your seatbelt because a sniper might get you
To extend your analogy, we are now driving at speeds that render the seatbelt inadequate. While it may still be wise to buckle up, we need a better seatbelt design, a supplementary measure, or a replacement.
Right now, we have IDS/IPS applications and ad/script blocking as reasonably good supplements. But even that isn't enough anymore---just as adding an air bag isn't enough to make a car safe at racetrack speeds.
There are suitable solutions for enterprise where the budget and administrative skills can support it, but there is really nothing for home users.
It is a huge liability to rely on virus definitions and heuristics engines. They are often too little, too late. The trend toward rapid development and advanced threats started about 15 years ago, and it has been making antimalware applications increasingly irrelevant.
Ad- and script-blocking helps, but those are targeted primarily at web browsing, and that is certainly not the only attack vector.
Whitelisting and mandatory access controls (e.g., SELinux) are the only truly effective measures, and they require a lot more work than antivirus. Antivirus is a simple 5-minute installation with automatic updates thereafter---and some even refuse to do that much. There is little hope that most home users will implement anything better.
There are adequate solutions, but they raise the bar in terms of the expertise, expense, and effort required. Even if a company addressed the "expense" issue by releasing a consumer-priced whitelisting application for Windows, there is no clear way to eliminate the other requirements.
In light of all this, I see things getting worse before they get better. It takes a lot of problems before home users pony up their time and money.
Someone has to innovate or offer quality products when the entrenched suppliers are mass-producing the same boring crap they produced last year.
Apple introduced the Newton a few years before PDAs took off.
Microsoft demoed a smartphone two years before that market took off.
Intel developed the ultrabook concept because laptop OEMs were complacent.
Microsoft made the Surface because the laptop OEMs were being cheap and producing crap for convertibles.
While I will continue to build my own PCs for the foreseeable future, I can still see a lot of places that would benefit from inexpensive-yet-durable AIO PCs. Education, basic users, and kiosks for starters.
Most power supplies run all 12V connections on a single output rail.
Whether it uses a 6-pin or 8-pin connector, the graphics card will draw power from the PSU in the exact same way.
Most of the time. It is possible that older PSUs have split 12V rails, which may cause problems. PSUs old enough to have split 12V lines will probably not have PCIe-compatible 6-pin and 8-pin connectors though. Those connectors were specifically designed for PCIe devices, so I would be very surprised if they are present on anything that old.
Still, even though it shouldn't be a problem anywhere, it would be nice if these companies could comply with the specifications. Especially when there is already a connector spec'd to handle that load.
Burned out PSUs instead of motherboards, here we come!
Exceedingly unlikely. The excess power draw through the motherboard was already being fed by the PSU.
Most PSUs have a single 12V rail that supplies all components in the system, including the motherboard.
As a result, the 12V rail is typically rated to supply most of the PSU's wattage. I would expect no issues unless the total system draw is near the PSU's capacity.
E.g., I have a 400W Seasonic PSU that can supply ~350W on the 12V line. I have an older GPU rated for 200W, and it has worked fine for years.
Swapping in the RX 480 with its 150-180W draw would cause no issues---especially after this driver fix. All power above the 75W limit for the PCIe slot will now be drawn from the ancillary power connector, as it should be. This is the same as previous cards, among them the 250-300W monstrosities marketed as Fury/Titan.
So you see no moral issues with the largest social media site with 1.60+ billion users
Nope. I opted out of Facebook a long time ago. Because I can do that, there is no moral issue.
When it comes to bias, Fox News is worse, and I do nothing aside from changing the channel.
Yes, that has worked well in the operating system arena with Microsoft throwing their whole weight against competitors.
There are alternatives. Good ones, too.
If enterprise organizations choose not to use these alternatives, then Microsoft will exist for a very long time regardless of what happens in the home and SOHO markets.
You could also legally call someone names on the street
To a point.
If the recipient opts out by attempting to end the interaction, the aggressor can usually be cited for disorderly conduct, assault, or harassment if he continues to follow and harangue the person.
it doesn't mean it's acceptable nor that the community should tolerate it
The law specifies what the community tolerates in the sense that people can freely engage in any legal behavior.
Whether another individual should accept the behavior is an entirely different matter, and there are always social and economic consequences privately.
In the case of Facebook, they lose users as a source of advertising revenue and data if they act inappropriately.
It sounds like Apple wants their 30% cut even though Spotify (and other apps) are multiplatform. And, in fact, users choose those apps/services because of their availability on multiple platforms.
To be fair, I think Apple should prorate its App Store cut based on the total platform footprint of the service.
E.g., if Spotify is on 4 platforms (iOS, MacOS, Windows, and Android), then Spotify pays 1/4 of the standard rate on subscriptions.
If this applied only to recurring subscription costs, it would have no effect on revenue from one-off app sales and in-app purchases.