It reduces the chances that your planet will be obliterated by the Vogons for an intergalactic highway construction project
Maybe once things have expanded and the species have learned enough not to destroy each other, someone will change the cosmological constant and bring them back together.
To be clear, this was a decision from a Federal Magistrate Judge in the Eastern District of NY. (E.g. Long Island and Staten Island). It is not binding on any other court, but it is a Federal Court Decision, which gives it more weight than most equivalent state court decisions, and it is from a fairly well-respected District. (For example, they are responsible for some of the classic electronic discovery cases). They are not the Southern District of New York, which is the rock star of District Courts--but it has enough persuasive weight that most other courts will take it at least a little seriously. They just aren't required to follow it.
I'm talking about three dimensional applications. Things like creating annotations on real-world objects, visualizing the internal parts of equipment, visual feedback from telepresence systems, architecting a house while standing "inside it" on the vacant lot, GPS navigation overlays in the real world...
Exactly.
There is a lot of MS hate on slashdot, and now people who haven't tried a product, much less tried all of the potential applications for it, are belittling it out of that juvenile hatred. If they don't like it they shouldn't buy it, but they're still going to bash it.
We're nerds. It's a cool technology. Let's play with it and see what we can do with it.
The technology has a huge potential for a wide array of uses, initially in the business space and then the luxury market, and over time it will improve and become more useful for everyday work in a variety of fields and for consumer use. The color monitor on an 8086 wasn't that impressive either, but color monitors kept getting better.
"the Presidential hopeful states the new law is necessary because the FCC's "burdensome" net neutrality rules are destroying innovation, diversity, and network investment."
Examples plz
They just realize the market will sort itself out better if utilities are unregulated and the Republicans are able to Bribe ISPs to load Democratic content slower.
So this was rated troll (perhaps because it seemed to demonize the party whose members are suggesting this), but actually points out the fundamental problem with deregulation--information pipes *are* common carriers and should have obligations to serve the public without discriminating on the basis of who wants to use them, just like bus companies have to treat passengers similarly.
A few of the big name schools make money from their football programs, most lose money.
Most lose money on the football program itself, but it still pays for itself or even brings in a lot of money through *donations* that they are able to encourage because people respond irrationally to football.
But unless you've got a WiFi hotspot with a firewall where you can Wireshark monitor your network traffic - you will have NO idea whether this thing is phoning home with a few extra details about your network, it's bad enough that it actually phones "home" with your IP address, I'm not sure if it does that - but it's def. worth an extra look.
And there's the rub. If you plant software in a million devices that come out of China, you have access to a million US Networks (usually in wealthier, higher-bandwidth homes) for attacks within those networks and attacks that use the network bandwidth to attack other targets. If you were in charge of corporate or state espionage in China, wouldn't you like to have access to the network of every software engineer or wealthy businessman who buys a new toy? How many IoT devices create a new vulnerability that can be exploited en masse or even for targeted attacks? How many can monitor wireless keyboard signals and read banking passwords?
"the Presidential hopeful states the new law is necessary because the FCC's "burdensome" net neutrality rules are destroying innovation, diversity, and network investment."
Examples plz
They just realize the market will sort itself out better if utilities are unregulated and the Republicans are able to Bribe ISPs to load Democratic content slower.
Are they just talking salary? As far as I know university presidents don't have stock options.
It is also a profoundly stupid critique in the first place. University Presidents are not only responsible for the whole university, but they are responsible for bringing in massive amounts of money. Your job is not only to provide leadership and support leaders underneath you, but to bring in the millions of dollars in donations that your school can use to expand its programs, increase financial aid, and keep tuition increases low.
If you were on a University Board of Trustees, wouldn't you want to spend the money to hire the right person for that job?
One super-power is - supposedly - "stealing", and another super-power is killing people, "militants", women, children, civilians, in smaller under-developed countries with little consideration for it. Who are the biggest shit-heads, really?
That's not really accurate. The USA is killing those people after a lot of consideration. Obviously they're making the wrong call in at least some cases, and there are cases where they may make the right call (because they kill someone who would otherwise destroy thousands of lives) but the innocent still die.
But the USA is also *VERY* easy for anyone who is trying to distract from their own failings and problems to paint as the bad guy. While the USA has done some really bad things, the harm being done to the world by many of the people it tries to kill is also a massive evil. It's not so black-and-white.
All of GP's critiques could have been made of the United States by a neutral party. There are a lot of things that The United States does better than China, but unloading on that list as if they were a uniquely Chinese problem makes GP more of a stereotype-induced-hatred-of-the-other than a legitimate critique of China.
Fundamentally, the United States foots the military budget for a huge portion of the developed world--Pretty much all of Western Europe, Japan, Australia, South Korea, etc...
While some of those countries have an impressive military budget, The UK, France, Germany, Japan, South Korea, Australia, Italy and Canada together spend only about 45% of what the US spends. (Not all are NATO members, but they all have significant military expenditures.)
If the US walked out of NATO it would lose 2/3rds of its military budget and a lot of its logiistical and nuclear capability. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Are there banks that *seriously* expect the customer to pay them money to keep their money for them....?
There are LOTS of banks that demand customers pay them money to keep their money for them. They're called "fees" and they mostly apply to people who are too poor.
A negative interest rate is an interest rate below zero. Most frequently this comes up in lending policy, when a country's central bank decides to stimulate the economy by letting banks borrow and receive some amount of interest for borrowing. That means there's no real advantage to an institution in holding cash, so yes, they may pass on a negative interest rate to a consumer. So there is an incentive to hold the money in cash (or better yet, in equities).
This stimulates the market because *borrowing* costs go down, so the cost of capital goes down; it's easier to borrow money to finance your business or your home improvement project.
OK, that was a single incident, which is a long way from a trend, much less from an institutionalized system, but hey, you played to the slashtard crowd and got modded up. Congratulations.
No, actually, this is a basic tool of jury selection. The thing that most influences the jury's work is the position of the foreperson; the thing that most influences foreperson selection is who sits at the head of the table; and the person most likely to sit at the head of a table is a man. Each side tries to eliminate the men they see as most likely to a be jury foreman sympathetic to the other side.
Sometimes eliminating intelligent people backfires. I know a guy who served on a case where all of the scientists on the jury realized a murderer had cremated his wife in a barrel in the backyard, and none of the laypeople believed it, so the murderer went free.
Exactly. "Fair," in this context, involves the consistent and systematic application of the law to Snowden's case.
Not necessarily. The law can be and often is unfair, if we take fairness to be the application of an unbiased system and judgment to the charge at hand. If the government asserts national security interests as a reason not to allow testimony about its programs (which it will), then it is impossible for him to get a fair trial. If the government insists on putting the jury through the security clearance process, it is also distorting the outcome by biasing the jury.
I definitely see both sides here, but find it highly unlikely the government will be willing to give him a trial that an unbiased observer would truly consider fair.
A world with fewer lawyers is one where lawyers are more expensive.
Expertise is expensive. The bigger problem isn't lawyers as a whole, it's a combination of (1) major needed reforms in the legal system, and (2) the lawyers who are especially big assholes.
Aside from the issue that this is a really stupid policy, can we please stop paying attention when so-and-so introduces legislation? ninety-nine times out of a hundred Introducing legislation is a cheap stunt used to run for election, knowing that the legislation will be referred to a subcommittee and will never again see the light of day. It might as well be a press release.
I've wondered why services don't allow you to do something like add a PGP public key, and all notifications from that site are sent encrypted to that key. If someone gets ahold of your reset email, well unless they have your private key and passphase, they're still out of luck. Furthermore, legit email notices could be signed by a known public key of the site.
OK, it was a bit rhetorical perhaps, as I know not many are familiar with PGP to use it. Outlook doesn't support it out of the box so that cuts out a lot of users right there. And even people technical enough to know what its doing don't always like it.
And I guess the problem then would be people saying "I forgot my PGP passphase, please help!". So maybe it wouldn't actually solve much and still be prone to social engineering. But still. In 2016 I would have thought we'd have a better handle on privacy and security.
Because that doesn't make sense from a business standpoint.
2-factor authentication to your phone works for most consumers. For higher-value accounts of celebrities, etc..., people should be able to pay to have password resets confirmed by fedex or by phone call to their IT department/agent/secretary.
Slashdot Mirror
It reduces the chances that your planet will be obliterated by the Vogons for an intergalactic highway construction project
Maybe once things have expanded and the species have learned enough not to destroy each other, someone will change the cosmological constant and bring them back together.
To be clear, this was a decision from a Federal Magistrate Judge in the Eastern District of NY. (E.g. Long Island and Staten Island). It is not binding on any other court, but it is a Federal Court Decision, which gives it more weight than most equivalent state court decisions, and it is from a fairly well-respected District. (For example, they are responsible for some of the classic electronic discovery cases). They are not the Southern District of New York, which is the rock star of District Courts--but it has enough persuasive weight that most other courts will take it at least a little seriously. They just aren't required to follow it.
I'm talking about three dimensional applications. Things like creating annotations on real-world objects, visualizing the internal parts of equipment, visual feedback from telepresence systems, architecting a house while standing "inside it" on the vacant lot, GPS navigation overlays in the real world...
Exactly.
There is a lot of MS hate on slashdot, and now people who haven't tried a product, much less tried all of the potential applications for it, are belittling it out of that juvenile hatred. If they don't like it they shouldn't buy it, but they're still going to bash it.
We're nerds. It's a cool technology. Let's play with it and see what we can do with it.
The technology has a huge potential for a wide array of uses, initially in the business space and then the luxury market, and over time it will improve and become more useful for everyday work in a variety of fields and for consumer use. The color monitor on an 8086 wasn't that impressive either, but color monitors kept getting better.
"the Presidential hopeful states the new law is necessary because the FCC's "burdensome" net neutrality rules are destroying innovation, diversity, and network investment."
Examples plz
They just realize the market will sort itself out better if utilities are unregulated and the Republicans are able to Bribe ISPs to load Democratic content slower.
So this was rated troll (perhaps because it seemed to demonize the party whose members are suggesting this), but actually points out the fundamental problem with deregulation--information pipes *are* common carriers and should have obligations to serve the public without discriminating on the basis of who wants to use them, just like bus companies have to treat passengers similarly.
A few of the big name schools make money from their football programs, most lose money.
Most lose money on the football program itself, but it still pays for itself or even brings in a lot of money through *donations* that they are able to encourage because people respond irrationally to football.
But unless you've got a WiFi hotspot with a firewall where you can Wireshark monitor your network traffic - you will have NO idea whether this thing is phoning home with a few extra details about your network, it's bad enough that it actually phones "home" with your IP address, I'm not sure if it does that - but it's def. worth an extra look.
And there's the rub. If you plant software in a million devices that come out of China, you have access to a million US Networks (usually in wealthier, higher-bandwidth homes) for attacks within those networks and attacks that use the network bandwidth to attack other targets. If you were in charge of corporate or state espionage in China, wouldn't you like to have access to the network of every software engineer or wealthy businessman who buys a new toy? How many IoT devices create a new vulnerability that can be exploited en masse or even for targeted attacks? How many can monitor wireless keyboard signals and read banking passwords?
"the Presidential hopeful states the new law is necessary because the FCC's "burdensome" net neutrality rules are destroying innovation, diversity, and network investment."
Examples plz
They just realize the market will sort itself out better if utilities are unregulated and the Republicans are able to Bribe ISPs to load Democratic content slower.
Are they just talking salary? As far as I know university presidents don't have stock options.
It is also a profoundly stupid critique in the first place. University Presidents are not only responsible for the whole university, but they are responsible for bringing in massive amounts of money. Your job is not only to provide leadership and support leaders underneath you, but to bring in the millions of dollars in donations that your school can use to expand its programs, increase financial aid, and keep tuition increases low.
If you were on a University Board of Trustees, wouldn't you want to spend the money to hire the right person for that job?
One super-power is - supposedly - "stealing", and another super-power is killing people, "militants", women, children, civilians, in smaller under-developed countries with little consideration for it. Who are the biggest shit-heads, really?
That's not really accurate. The USA is killing those people after a lot of consideration. Obviously they're making the wrong call in at least some cases, and there are cases where they may make the right call (because they kill someone who would otherwise destroy thousands of lives) but the innocent still die.
But the USA is also *VERY* easy for anyone who is trying to distract from their own failings and problems to paint as the bad guy. While the USA has done some really bad things, the harm being done to the world by many of the people it tries to kill is also a massive evil. It's not so black-and-white.
All of GP's critiques could have been made of the United States by a neutral party. There are a lot of things that The United States does better than China, but unloading on that list as if they were a uniquely Chinese problem makes GP more of a stereotype-induced-hatred-of-the-other than a legitimate critique of China.
Fundamentally, the United States foots the military budget for a huge portion of the developed world--Pretty much all of Western Europe, Japan, Australia, South Korea, etc...
While some of those countries have an impressive military budget, The UK, France, Germany, Japan, South Korea, Australia, Italy and Canada together spend only about 45% of what the US spends. (Not all are NATO members, but they all have significant military expenditures.)
If the US walked out of NATO it would lose 2/3rds of its military budget and a lot of its logiistical and nuclear capability. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Unfortunately for now China is pretty much the biggest shithead in the world.
So what you're saying is, you haven't been following the Republican debates?
The apple brief is available here: https://cryptome.org/2016/02/u...
Ted Olson (solicitor general to the United States under Bush) is on-brief.
Chinese hackers?
Probable China, slight chance of Russia or North Korea, small chance of the UK or another country.
Also vendor SDKs that are loaded from their canonical sources, etc...
What exactly is a negative interest rate?
Are there banks that *seriously* expect the customer to pay them money to keep their money for them....?
There are LOTS of banks that demand customers pay them money to keep their money for them. They're called "fees" and they mostly apply to people who are too poor.
A negative interest rate is an interest rate below zero. Most frequently this comes up in lending policy, when a country's central bank decides to stimulate the economy by letting banks borrow and receive some amount of interest for borrowing. That means there's no real advantage to an institution in holding cash, so yes, they may pass on a negative interest rate to a consumer. So there is an incentive to hold the money in cash (or better yet, in equities).
This stimulates the market because *borrowing* costs go down, so the cost of capital goes down; it's easier to borrow money to finance your business or your home improvement project.
mostly kids... they could use some press?
There's nothing wrong with putting a topic in perspective. Parent should not have been modded offtopic.
Anyone dumb enough to put information about their kids into a database on the internet deserves everything they get.
I see you rolled a crit fail for wisdom.
OK, that was a single incident, which is a long way from a trend, much less from an institutionalized system, but hey, you played to the slashtard crowd and got modded up. Congratulations.
No, actually, this is a basic tool of jury selection. The thing that most influences the jury's work is the position of the foreperson; the thing that most influences foreperson selection is who sits at the head of the table; and the person most likely to sit at the head of a table is a man. Each side tries to eliminate the men they see as most likely to a be jury foreman sympathetic to the other side.
Sometimes eliminating intelligent people backfires. I know a guy who served on a case where all of the scientists on the jury realized a murderer had cremated his wife in a barrel in the backyard, and none of the laypeople believed it, so the murderer went free.
Exactly. "Fair," in this context, involves the consistent and systematic application of the law to Snowden's case.
Not necessarily. The law can be and often is unfair, if we take fairness to be the application of an unbiased system and judgment to the charge at hand. If the government asserts national security interests as a reason not to allow testimony about its programs (which it will), then it is impossible for him to get a fair trial. If the government insists on putting the jury through the security clearance process, it is also distorting the outcome by biasing the jury.
I definitely see both sides here, but find it highly unlikely the government will be willing to give him a trial that an unbiased observer would truly consider fair.
Are we really hubristic enough to think we will ever have a theory that predicts and explains everything with 100% accuracy at all levels?
We invented a God who created the universe and pretended he looked like us. Yes, we have more than enough hubris.
A world with less lawers is a nicer world.
A world with fewer lawyers is one where lawyers are more expensive.
Expertise is expensive. The bigger problem isn't lawyers as a whole, it's a combination of (1) major needed reforms in the legal system, and (2) the lawyers who are especially big assholes.
The second problem is especially hard to solve.
To be clear, they're the guys with the tanks.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Aside from the issue that this is a really stupid policy, can we please stop paying attention when so-and-so introduces legislation? ninety-nine times out of a hundred Introducing legislation is a cheap stunt used to run for election, knowing that the legislation will be referred to a subcommittee and will never again see the light of day. It might as well be a press release.
I've wondered why services don't allow you to do something like add a PGP public key, and all notifications from that site are sent encrypted to that key. If someone gets ahold of your reset email, well unless they have your private key and passphase, they're still out of luck. Furthermore, legit email notices could be signed by a known public key of the site.
OK, it was a bit rhetorical perhaps, as I know not many are familiar with PGP to use it. Outlook doesn't support it out of the box so that cuts out a lot of users right there. And even people technical enough to know what its doing don't always like it.
And I guess the problem then would be people saying "I forgot my PGP passphase, please help!". So maybe it wouldn't actually solve much and still be prone to social engineering. But still. In 2016 I would have thought we'd have a better handle on privacy and security.
Because that doesn't make sense from a business standpoint.
2-factor authentication to your phone works for most consumers. For higher-value accounts of celebrities, etc..., people should be able to pay to have password resets confirmed by fedex or by phone call to their IT department/agent/secretary.