Despite all their Orwellian, unconstitutional acts of treason against the American public, I'm sure the NSA is also still continuing to perform counterintelligence against foreign threats (e.g. the Chinese) like they're supposed to.
in order to really maximize your utility, you should aim to specialize in two or three things that are complimentary within your target industry. By combining two specialties, you can be incredibly valuable without actually being a world-class champion in either.
If you're lucky enough that those complementary specialties happen to have job openings available, that is. I've got full-blown bachelor's degrees in two different fields and haven't found a job that uses both yet.
And it still fucking depends. If you can get your AGI low enough (via tax-deferred, i.e., not Roth, 401(k) or IRA contributions) then you might suddenly become eligible for things like the Saver's Credit. You might even be able to get your AGI so low that you can put part of your money in a Roth and pay zero taxes now and later.
Maybe it's irrelevant if you're single and making $100K in the Valley, but if you're married with one income and a couple of kids in a low cost-of-living area it's different.
We'd still have global warming even with 100% of electricity being generated from nuclear power (or solar/wind, for that matter). To stop it, you have to eliminate the fossil fuels used in transportation too.
(I suppose it's possible cars and airplanes might have switched to tiny fission reactors or RTGs in the absence of environmentalist opposition -- or that electric vehicles might have become popular sooner -- but it doesn't strike me as likely.)
It seems to me that a lot of the performance tuning knowledge is getting lost on a large percentage of devs
As a web developer I'd like to care about such things, but I spend all my time four or five layers of abstraction away from the server and all the performance-related backlogs are prioritized so far behind new revenue-producing features that they'll happen sometime between "six decades from now" and "heat death of the universe."
Comcast itself records the call too... last time I had a dispute like that, I told them to go listen to their own recording, which would prove I was correct. They refused until I filed a Better Business Bureau complaint, but once they did they honored their CSR's promise.
(You should still record the call yourself instead of relying on Comcast's copy, though!)
You can't climb a ladder and take pics of some girl sunbathing in her backyard legally if she is behind a privacy fence that you had to go out of your way to see over, that includes using a drone to do so.
So does that mean a 5' 6" tall photographer is legally prohibited from taking a picture over a 6' privacy fence, but a 6' 6" tall photographer is not?
An mp3 file is not considered tangible personal property... I can buy a book and somebody can inherit it. I cannot buy a pattern of electrons called an ebook and somebody inherit it.
Nobody except the RIAA, MPAA, et. al. has ever made a legal argument that such a distinction exists. I do not believe it exists. I do not believe that any court has ruled that such a distinction exists or that any law has been enacted that creates such a distinction. I think you are an RIAA (et al) shill, spreading FUD.
Excuse me. I guess I should have said "successful research" -- like this (which is a study about a system that specifically was able to de-anonymize patient medical records!):
"Often organizations release and receive medical data with all explicit identifiers, such as name, address, phone number, and Social Security number, removed in the incorrect belief that patient confidentiality is maintained because the resulting data look anonymous; however, we show that in most of these cases, the remaining data can be used to re-identify individuals by linking or matching the data to other databases or by looking at unique characteristics found in the fields and records of the database itself."
Granted, it does go on to say "when these less apparent aspects are taken into account, each released record can be made to ambiguously map to many possible people, providing a level of anonymity which the user determines," but I see no reason whatsoever to expect that any actual medical billing software company would spend that extra effort. In fact, the quotation itself says that's exactly what happens!
regardless of your unsupported claim that such info is easily de-anonymized.
1. A huge amount of de-anonymization research is being done these days (both academically and by companies like Google, Amazon, etc.)
2. Medical billing companies are trying to maximize profit, so they aren't going to put much effort into preventing de-anonymization (i.e., they're going to do the bare-minimum to be plausibly HIPAA-compliant).
Given the above, I think the idea that such info might not be easily de-anonymized is the extraordinary claim that needs support!
How about you go learn about the First Sale doctrine and fuck off? There are a lot of products (not services) that shouldn't "magically" stop being products just because they're "on a computer!"
Everyone who has used the Internet has downloaded copyrighted content. You've done so just now, in fact -- the very text you're currently reading is copyrighted (by me).
The issue is whether you have not been authorized to download the copyrighted content, and that's what should require a strong burden of proof on the part of the copyright holder.
And the UK, whether you think they are in collusion or not, have the right to enforce their law on their soil (and, no, the embassy is NOT Ecuadorian soil, don't make that "old wives' tale" mistake).
Oh yeah? Then why don't they just go into the embassy and get him?
Even if the UK couldn't care less about Sweden's demands, they went through the proper channels, offered appeals, it went to the Supreme Court and he ran away from UK bail. Game over. We HAVE to arrest you the second you try to leave or every Tom, Dick and Harry will follow suit thinking it's a "get out of jail free card" to just resist arrest and skip bail.
Sure, because every petty crook is going to uproot his entire life and start over in a completely different country. That makes tons of sense!
No, you dumbass, Assange is holed up in the embassy precisely because he thinks being stuck there indefinitely (which isn't that different from a life sentence in prison) is better than the alternative.
Not to mention the fact that, unlike Assange, "every Tom, Dick and Harry" doesn't have a reason to seek asylum that the embassy officials would accept. I can just imagine the conversation:
Criminal: Help, I need asylum!
Embassy official: Why?
Criminal: because I robbed a store and don't want to go to jail! Now let me in!
I'm not convinced that it's necessarily harder to find a progressive viewpoint on radio than it is on TV. My guess is that people who pay for TV to listen to while they do chores either A) are interested in particular commentators who have TV shows but not radio shows, or (more likely) B) think cable TV is just "something you have" and haven't reexamined how much it costs or how much actual utility they're getting from it. It's one of those things that really only becomes clear in retrospect, after you've cut the cord.
Second, the claim "Internet + TV is cheaper than Internet by itself" was referring to a plan that included only basic cable (the channels you'd get with an antenna). Any plan that included the likes of ESPN and TNT would be more expensive than Internet-only (or at least, I sure would hope so!).
Third, Comcast's offerings have improved this year: last year I was at $40/month for Internet + basic cable ($37 once I found out that they were supposed to be giving me a discount for using CableCard instead of a box); this year they actually had an advertised offer for $20/month Internet-only.
Slashdot Mirror
Why is this surprising? Today's adults grew up on Nintendo. The guy from The Wizard is 38, for crying out loud!
You think Georgia doesn't have a lot of immigrants? It's got a higher percentage than New Mexico (9.5% vs 9.2%)!
Despite all their Orwellian, unconstitutional acts of treason against the American public, I'm sure the NSA is also still continuing to perform counterintelligence against foreign threats (e.g. the Chinese) like they're supposed to.
What we really need to do is start using a distributed search engine.
If you're lucky enough that those complementary specialties happen to have job openings available, that is. I've got full-blown bachelor's degrees in two different fields and haven't found a job that uses both yet.
And it still fucking depends. If you can get your AGI low enough (via tax-deferred, i.e., not Roth, 401(k) or IRA contributions) then you might suddenly become eligible for things like the Saver's Credit. You might even be able to get your AGI so low that you can put part of your money in a Roth and pay zero taxes now and later.
Maybe it's irrelevant if you're single and making $100K in the Valley, but if you're married with one income and a couple of kids in a low cost-of-living area it's different.
The problem is not lack of courage; the problem is that such a "solution" doesn't exist.
We'd still have global warming even with 100% of electricity being generated from nuclear power (or solar/wind, for that matter). To stop it, you have to eliminate the fossil fuels used in transportation too.
(I suppose it's possible cars and airplanes might have switched to tiny fission reactors or RTGs in the absence of environmentalist opposition -- or that electric vehicles might have become popular sooner -- but it doesn't strike me as likely.)
How? It doesn't have a removable battery anymore.
As a web developer I'd like to care about such things, but I spend all my time four or five layers of abstraction away from the server and all the performance-related backlogs are prioritized so far behind new revenue-producing features that they'll happen sometime between "six decades from now" and "heat death of the universe."
Comcast itself records the call too... last time I had a dispute like that, I told them to go listen to their own recording, which would prove I was correct. They refused until I filed a Better Business Bureau complaint, but once they did they honored their CSR's promise.
(You should still record the call yourself instead of relying on Comcast's copy, though!)
So does that mean a 5' 6" tall photographer is legally prohibited from taking a picture over a 6' privacy fence, but a 6' 6" tall photographer is not?
O really? Then cite one or fuck off!
Nobody except the RIAA, MPAA, et. al. has ever made a legal argument that such a distinction exists. I do not believe it exists. I do not believe that any court has ruled that such a distinction exists or that any law has been enacted that creates such a distinction. I think you are an RIAA (et al) shill, spreading FUD.
Now put up or shut up.
Excuse me. I guess I should have said "successful research" -- like this (which is a study about a system that specifically was able to de-anonymize patient medical records!):
Granted, it does go on to say "when these less apparent aspects are taken into account, each released record can be made to ambiguously map to many possible people, providing a level of anonymity which the user determines," but I see no reason whatsoever to expect that any actual medical billing software company would spend that extra effort. In fact, the quotation itself says that's exactly what happens!
It doesn't matter in this case, since -- per the fucking summary -- the computer in question is using an AMD A4 (which is x86).
Given the above, I think the idea that such info might not be easily de-anonymized is the extraordinary claim that needs support!
It's not a HIPAA violation because it's "aggregated and anonymized" (but we all know how easy it is to de-anonymize that kind of thing...).
I've heard it first hand from somebody who works at a medical billing software company (not going to be more specific for employment reasons, sorry).
Bullshit. They most certainly do own that copy of the music, and none of your ridiculous FUD and RIAA shilling will change that.
How about you go learn about the First Sale doctrine and fuck off? There are a lot of products (not services) that shouldn't "magically" stop being products just because they're "on a computer!"
Everyone who has used the Internet has downloaded copyrighted content. You've done so just now, in fact -- the very text you're currently reading is copyrighted (by me).
The issue is whether you have not been authorized to download the copyrighted content, and that's what should require a strong burden of proof on the part of the copyright holder.
Oh yeah? Then why don't they just go into the embassy and get him?
Sure, because every petty crook is going to uproot his entire life and start over in a completely different country. That makes tons of sense!
No, you dumbass, Assange is holed up in the embassy precisely because he thinks being stuck there indefinitely (which isn't that different from a life sentence in prison) is better than the alternative.
Not to mention the fact that, unlike Assange, "every Tom, Dick and Harry" doesn't have a reason to seek asylum that the embassy officials would accept. I can just imagine the conversation:
I'm not convinced that it's necessarily harder to find a progressive viewpoint on radio than it is on TV. My guess is that people who pay for TV to listen to while they do chores either A) are interested in particular commentators who have TV shows but not radio shows, or (more likely) B) think cable TV is just "something you have" and haven't reexamined how much it costs or how much actual utility they're getting from it. It's one of those things that really only becomes clear in retrospect, after you've cut the cord.
First, thanks for citing my previous posts.
Second, the claim "Internet + TV is cheaper than Internet by itself" was referring to a plan that included only basic cable (the channels you'd get with an antenna). Any plan that included the likes of ESPN and TNT would be more expensive than Internet-only (or at least, I sure would hope so!).
Third, Comcast's offerings have improved this year: last year I was at $40/month for Internet + basic cable ($37 once I found out that they were supposed to be giving me a discount for using CableCard instead of a box); this year they actually had an advertised offer for $20/month Internet-only.
FTFY.