"Most of the teams in Google basically never think about advertising..."
You should have simply stopped at "...never think." Like how the maps group never thinks about how people actually use it for navigation while driving, so feel free to make major UI changes on a whim. Or, forcing you to interact more than necessary to actually begin navigating (press "directions," then press "start.").
"development of everything is rather bottom-up, not top-down. "
So, any citizen has the exact same right of self defense - the right to use of deadly force when there is a reasonable belief of a significant threat.
So, do you believe that you can shoot anyone you see in a dark alley who sticks their hand in their pocket, and then claim self-defense? How about if you see a cop reach for his weapon, clearly visible on his hip - can you shoot him because he presents a threat?
Nope. They might with equal (un)reasonableness claim they thought he was reaching for a Beanie Baby. Every time you see someone putting a hand in their pocket, do you think they're going for a gun? If so, you're unreasonably paranoid. It's unreasonable because there was no evidence of a gun, and any assumption there might have been one was unsupported by facts, which are the basis of reason.
"The officer who fired the shot, along with some others, thought Finch was reaching for a gun."
Yep. Not possible. You can't reach for a gun when there is no gun. Use of deadly force is only justified when there is a reasonable belief of a significant threat. Without seeing a weapon, the belief is unreasonable. The officer should be in prison for manslaughter.
"The shop agreed to be licensed as an Apple Authorized repair center."
Authoritative source needed, because that's not at all what the article says. The article says it was an "independent" and "unauthorized" repair shop. It also says "PCKompaniet does not pretend or market itself as Apple authorized and does not give any indication that the repair comes with an Apple warranty.â
Point to a broadly supported RFC with service available from a wide range of trusted organizations, and not some unique solution (which I've already linked to), and then you can legitimately claim that "encrypted DNS already exists."
Finally, the summary gets to the core. All the rest is fear-mongering. More, and increasingly more, services are encrypted. The one which isn't, and needs to be, is DNS, which traffic they could snoop to see who you're talking with. But, some trusted VPN or TOR or other solution will get around even that, if someone cares.
With so much content being cloud hosted (AWS/Azure/GCloud), it's getting hard to tell who someones talking to just by IP, which is all the ISPs have left if traffic is encrypted.
Yep, and even if seeking "best," that's likely unrelated to the CPU. SSD vs. hard drive or TN/VA/IPS display probably makes a bigger difference to the user experience.
"What is the hypothetical mechanism for low-level non-ionizing radiation to cause tumors?"
You're confusing cause and effect. The cell phone towers are attracting researchers with bad methodology and poor statistical skills via a well known profit mechanism.
BS. The same people also demand new-in-the-box units, not the ones returned by others of their ilk. That costs the rest of us real money in higher prices.
I've been on enough boards to know that there exists a significant "customer" base which is perfectly willing to unethically take maximum benefit of easy return policies for personal benefit. Like - "I know the new TV models will be out in a month, but I want a 4K now, so I'll buy one and then return it and get a new one when they're available." (or, "I'll buy one for my Superbowl party, and return it a couple weeks later" or similar)
That's why we can't have nice things (policies). If someone's purchase doesn't meet their legitimate, reasonable expectations, fine, return it. But there are many who know up front that they'll be returning it later, or expect to go through multiple returns so they can cherry pick the best of the best. Fuck 'em. Such abuse only ends up costing everyone else more, and I have an issue with funding reprobates.
Slashdot Mirror
"Most of the teams in Google basically never think about advertising..."
You should have simply stopped at "...never think." Like how the maps group never thinks about how people actually use it for navigation while driving, so feel free to make major UI changes on a whim. Or, forcing you to interact more than necessary to actually begin navigating (press "directions," then press "start.").
"development of everything is rather bottom-up, not top-down. "
That explains it - no adult supervision.
#deletefacebook
(meme from Twitter, and maybe that too) For anyone who cares the path is clear. If you don't care, do nothing and quityerbitchin.
Do, or do not. There is no try.
So, any citizen has the exact same right of self defense - the right to use of deadly force when there is a reasonable belief of a significant threat.
So, do you believe that you can shoot anyone you see in a dark alley who sticks their hand in their pocket, and then claim self-defense? How about if you see a cop reach for his weapon, clearly visible on his hip - can you shoot him because he presents a threat?
Nope. They might with equal (un)reasonableness claim they thought he was reaching for a Beanie Baby. Every time you see someone putting a hand in their pocket, do you think they're going for a gun? If so, you're unreasonably paranoid. It's unreasonable because there was no evidence of a gun, and any assumption there might have been one was unsupported by facts, which are the basis of reason.
"The officer who fired the shot, along with some others, thought Finch was reaching for a gun."
Yep. Not possible. You can't reach for a gun when there is no gun. Use of deadly force is only justified when there is a reasonable belief of a significant threat. Without seeing a weapon, the belief is unreasonable. The officer should be in prison for manslaughter.
"The shop agreed to be licensed as an Apple Authorized repair center."
Authoritative source needed, because that's not at all what the article says. The article says it was an "independent" and "unauthorized" repair shop. It also says "PCKompaniet does not pretend or market itself as Apple authorized and does not give any indication that the repair comes with an Apple warranty.â
"...one day I'm doing 50, looking in the glovebox for my favourite Barry Manilow CD, well we all know what happens then."
You want to kill yourself, and let the car help?
Wait, he's complaining that he has to use paper in order to get a piece of paper?
"And which "trusted organizations" would those be?... there are plenty of "trusted organizations""
You're confused.
Point to a broadly supported RFC with service available from a wide range of trusted organizations, and not some unique solution (which I've already linked to), and then you can legitimately claim that "encrypted DNS already exists."
"Everything that is unencrypted is fair game."
Finally, the summary gets to the core. All the rest is fear-mongering. More, and increasingly more, services are encrypted. The one which isn't, and needs to be, is DNS, which traffic they could snoop to see who you're talking with. But, some trusted VPN or TOR or other solution will get around even that, if someone cares.
With so much content being cloud hosted (AWS/Azure/GCloud), it's getting hard to tell who someones talking to just by IP, which is all the ISPs have left if traffic is encrypted.
"so many dedicated buttons that you couldn't pick it up without triggering something"
Now we have touch screens so close to the edges that you can't pick it up without triggering something. Progress.
"Really? "Popular" seems a bit of a stretch."
The OP must figure that two wrongs make a right - the Essential Phone had a notch before the iPhone.
Because helping sociopaths withdraw further by conversing with bots is a good thing?
Generating hot air, obviously.
Yep, and even if seeking "best," that's likely unrelated to the CPU. SSD vs. hard drive or TN/VA/IPS display probably makes a bigger difference to the user experience.
"...would..."
The article is BS. Do. Or do not. There is no try.
I play Microchess on my KIM-1.
"What is the hypothetical mechanism for low-level non-ionizing radiation to cause tumors?"
You're confusing cause and effect. The cell phone towers are attracting researchers with bad methodology and poor statistical skills via a well known profit mechanism.
"...no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, ..."
What judge signed the warrant? They're a clear and present danger to the Constitution.
"Flopped?" They'd have to first be a success in order to flop. They're a solution looking for a problem.
Time? Timex, FTW!
BS. The same people also demand new-in-the-box units, not the ones returned by others of their ilk. That costs the rest of us real money in higher prices.
So, if I understand this correctly, Youtube is in a conspiracy with Wikimedia to suppress free speech.
I've been on enough boards to know that there exists a significant "customer" base which is perfectly willing to unethically take maximum benefit of easy return policies for personal benefit. Like - "I know the new TV models will be out in a month, but I want a 4K now, so I'll buy one and then return it and get a new one when they're available." (or, "I'll buy one for my Superbowl party, and return it a couple weeks later" or similar)
That's why we can't have nice things (policies). If someone's purchase doesn't meet their legitimate, reasonable expectations, fine, return it. But there are many who know up front that they'll be returning it later, or expect to go through multiple returns so they can cherry pick the best of the best. Fuck 'em. Such abuse only ends up costing everyone else more, and I have an issue with funding reprobates.