Welcome to the real world, most of us don't live in Theory. What you claim is only true if you have a lawyer on retainer. Otherwise, say goodbye to your credit rating and more.
As long as this is an equitable two-way street, I don't see a problem. If, the second time (which would make them a repeat offender) a "rights holder" misuses email to accuse someone falsely their own Internet service is cut off, this could work. Same with misusing the postal service.
"Nobody is holding a gun to your head making you pay for TV at all."
Ultimately, someone may be. Those under contract, who paid for service at a specific rate are now seeing price increases to the service being disguised as government mandated "fees." Stop paying before the contract ends, and ultimately the full force of government law enforcement (which includes guns) may come into play.
Yeah, it's a stretch in the real world, but so is claiming that such people have a real choice. Do you "you feel morally and mentally superior?"
"this then burdens the other parent with taking care of the baby 100% - likely the woman who just had a major medical event and is still recovering."
It's amazing you're even here, what with all the harsh realities your ancestors had to actually deal with in life. If you're unable to make life choices which you can handle yourself, you have no one to blame but yourself.
If someone's ever actually interacted with an Adobe product, they know. They're shit. Really. Open an Acrobat index, and the search dialog (which is what you want to get to) appears _behind_ a blank document window, which is useless. WTF?
Adobe's contribution to computing began and ended with Postscript. I'll also give some credit for the pdf format/concept itself, despite obvious flaws in the implementation. Photoshop is a convoluted mess which is successful in spite of its faults, purely due to inertia and lack of competition. All else they've ever created simply sucks.
I'd believe the spaghetti code explanation, but that's a rationalization, not an excuse.
Your claim (and that of other's, below) is simply wrong.
Because, any USB charger expected to work with a wide range of devices does in fact have connections to the USB data pins. If they are unconnected, a USB device can draw no more "one unit load" (0.1 A) from the port. If the data lines are actively used, a device can negotiate to 500 mA. Using the USB charging spec, the data pins are shorted together or with a 200 ohm resistor (depends on the version of the spec), and a device it can draw up to 1.5 A. But that's still unlikely to cause problems with other ports.
What is a concern is that there are lots of proprietary extensions beyond the USB spec. Apple and Qualcomm are two big players in that regard, using the data lines to signal the availability of current and/or voltages more that the USB spec itself allows. Modern "universal" charging ports actively use the USB data lines to identify the device type and then negotiate available power. These types of ports are becoming more common everyday.
Even if ports are sufficiently isolated so that one of these "killers" couldn't effect other ports, it's possible that they could damage the port they're plugged into, potentially causing it to deliver voltage damaging to other devices. Even though ESD protection is likely provided (just as it is on a computer's USB port), that's meant to handle only low energy situations (high volt/low amps). These killers are designed to accumulate, then deliver a much greater charge than that.
In exactly what way does a computer with "Thunderbolt 3 (USB-C)" ports not have USB ports? Apple will happily sell you an adapter which one of these things plugs into.
I can just picture someone plugging one of these into one of those public charging kiosks at an airport. Wanna bet how well the ports are well isolated?
"AT&T said exempting services like DirecTV Now from data caps saves customers money. "
No, it doesn't. Wireless network costs are shifted onto consumers who don't buy their streaming services. If all the costs of streaming bandwidth are included in the price of the streaming service, then reduce the cost of that service and let the consumers pay for the bandwidth directly, just like customers who use competitive streaming services.
No. A stock or bond is merely a representation of ownership, so it's a matter of trust. With Bitcoin, you verifiably hold the actual item, just like gold.
Asset != security. AFAIK, Bitcoin exchanges fall under neither banking nor broker reporting requirements. Bitcoin is more like going down to the local coin dealer and buying gold Maple Leafs with cash - no reporting required.
Aside from the legality of such a broad fishing expedition, Bitcoin is considered an asset, so anyone who "buys low/sells high" would be subject to capital gains tax.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not so sure about that. The Crows really don't like the Sioux.
Welcome to the real world, most of us don't live in Theory. What you claim is only true if you have a lawyer on retainer. Otherwise, say goodbye to your credit rating and more.
As long as this is an equitable two-way street, I don't see a problem. If, the second time (which would make them a repeat offender) a "rights holder" misuses email to accuse someone falsely their own Internet service is cut off, this could work. Same with misusing the postal service.
"Nobody is holding a gun to your head making you pay for TV at all."
Ultimately, someone may be. Those under contract, who paid for service at a specific rate are now seeing price increases to the service being disguised as government mandated "fees." Stop paying before the contract ends, and ultimately the full force of government law enforcement (which includes guns) may come into play.
Yeah, it's a stretch in the real world, but so is claiming that such people have a real choice. Do you "you feel morally and mentally superior?"
"you're going to have to accept that people in the West need to have children as well"
So, you're busy breeding cannon fodder?
"this then burdens the other parent with taking care of the baby 100% - likely the woman who just had a major medical event and is still recovering."
It's amazing you're even here, what with all the harsh realities your ancestors had to actually deal with in life. If you're unable to make life choices which you can handle yourself, you have no one to blame but yourself.
"So what would you do if this ransomware infected your files?"
No, the answer is not paying a ransom, or infecting friends (or VMs). The correct answer is to reformat the storage and restore from a backup.
"You can only have one number one priority"
When I'm called to action, #2 is a higher priority than #1.
"Reread the parent post with "renumeration" in place of salary."
Renumeration? You're arguing that he should just make up numbers?
How can they live on welfare when they have to pay for Social Security for old farts?
Seriously, it's a zero-sum game. Ignoring personal/familial responsibility and relying on future generations to pay the bill is an ultimate fail.
If they truly cared, they would have figured out how to make wireless earphones work properly before removing the headphone jack from their phones.
So, you're claiming Germany doesn't let people own rocks or pointy sticks?
If someone's ever actually interacted with an Adobe product, they know. They're shit. Really. Open an Acrobat index, and the search dialog (which is what you want to get to) appears _behind_ a blank document window, which is useless. WTF?
Adobe's contribution to computing began and ended with Postscript. I'll also give some credit for the pdf format/concept itself, despite obvious flaws in the implementation. Photoshop is a convoluted mess which is successful in spite of its faults, purely due to inertia and lack of competition. All else they've ever created simply sucks.
I'd believe the spaghetti code explanation, but that's a rationalization, not an excuse.
Is it now politically incorrect to say "ivory tower?"
You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
"a charging port shouldn't have any data lines"
You're wrong. A useful USB charging port _must_ have connections to the data lines (see my post, above).
"Public charging ports don't have data lines"
Your claim (and that of other's, below) is simply wrong.
Because, any USB charger expected to work with a wide range of devices does in fact have connections to the USB data pins. If they are unconnected, a USB device can draw no more "one unit load" (0.1 A) from the port. If the data lines are actively used, a device can negotiate to 500 mA. Using the USB charging spec, the data pins are shorted together or with a 200 ohm resistor (depends on the version of the spec), and a device it can draw up to 1.5 A. But that's still unlikely to cause problems with other ports.
What is a concern is that there are lots of proprietary extensions beyond the USB spec. Apple and Qualcomm are two big players in that regard, using the data lines to signal the availability of current and/or voltages more that the USB spec itself allows. Modern "universal" charging ports actively use the USB data lines to identify the device type and then negotiate available power. These types of ports are becoming more common everyday.
Even if ports are sufficiently isolated so that one of these "killers" couldn't effect other ports, it's possible that they could damage the port they're plugged into, potentially causing it to deliver voltage damaging to other devices. Even though ESD protection is likely provided (just as it is on a computer's USB port), that's meant to handle only low energy situations (high volt/low amps). These killers are designed to accumulate, then deliver a much greater charge than that.
In exactly what way does a computer with "Thunderbolt 3 (USB-C)" ports not have USB ports? Apple will happily sell you an adapter which one of these things plugs into.
I can just picture someone plugging one of these into one of those public charging kiosks at an airport. Wanna bet how well the ports are well isolated?
"AT&T said exempting services like DirecTV Now from data caps saves customers money. "
No, it doesn't. Wireless network costs are shifted onto consumers who don't buy their streaming services. If all the costs of streaming bandwidth are included in the price of the streaming service, then reduce the cost of that service and let the consumers pay for the bandwidth directly, just like customers who use competitive streaming services.
No. A stock or bond is merely a representation of ownership, so it's a matter of trust. With Bitcoin, you verifiably hold the actual item, just like gold.
Asset != security. AFAIK, Bitcoin exchanges fall under neither banking nor broker reporting requirements. Bitcoin is more like going down to the local coin dealer and buying gold Maple Leafs with cash - no reporting required.
To quote Ren & Stimpy: "Appy, appy, joy, joy!"
Aside from the legality of such a broad fishing expedition, Bitcoin is considered an asset, so anyone who "buys low/sells high" would be subject to capital gains tax.
"Americans have a long tradition of voting incompetent but popular figures into office."
They've been doing it for decades.