A credit score doesn't monitor your real time activity.
A credit score is based on past activity and ability to pay.
It doesn't have a bearing on whether or not a particular transaction is a risk, as much as it measures the customer's ability and likelihood to honor their debts. This doesn't really apply if the user's information is being appropriated by scammers.
I'm curious what features are being added/removed?
One thing I'd like to see in a formal DNS configuration, is the ability to map an A record to a CNAME alias.
I know that some of the top level hosting companies like Cloudflare, have their own hacked DNS that adds that functionality so they can perform load balancing. In turn, they often demand complete control of the nameservers for domains they host, which I don't think is a good idea. Hopefully these changes will address this situation?
Stocks represent actual equity and shares in something tangible.
While you can create companies, their share value is mapped to the tangible value of the company.
With crypto, the value of a crypto currency is completely nebulous and arbitrary. It's even less tangible than Dutch tulips or Beanie Babies. The idea that anybody would use crypto as an investment is absurd. Yes, some people are making money in crypto, just like some people make money in Ponzi schemes, but only a tiny percentage, and the overall structure of the operation is incredibly fragile and will inevitably implode. The whole crypto market is a global game of hot potato played by charlatans and fools.
This sounds like a neat idea in theory but in practice it's unlikely to work.
I can applaud the idea of a utopian society, except it's a thousand times easier to try and create one within our own society, well-integrated into the systems that are needed, than it is to completely DIY it from the ground up. The area in Nevada he's purchased is pretty miserable in any season. Hot and dry, very cold at night. The only advantage to living there is you don't need much deodorant because the environment is so hostile, not even bacteria do well.
What bothers me about this is the general mentality of wanting to separate oneself from society.. as if once you're away from all the influences you disagree with, you think you can create something better? In theory that sounds great, but in reality, you quickly find there's a very good reason society is the way it is, and one reason is because people don't work hard enough to make it better and instead would rather take their ball and go someplace else.
>it should be made clear to everyone that software engineering is not such a field. You can (and must) accomplish small things without talking to people, but to do anything of real significance communication is an essential skill.
Software engineering is indeed, such a field. You can't offend a computer. Debugging requires zero politesse.
What you're talking about, requiring significant communication skills is an entirely different discipline: marketing.
“Great spirits have always encountered opposition from mediocre minds. The mediocre mind is incapable of understanding the man who refuses to bow blindly to conventional prejudices and chooses instead to express his opinions courageously and honestly.”
>Found the guy who's been reported to HR for having 'humourous' homophobic post-it notes on his monitor.
Found the guy who has to attack the messenger in order to ignore the fact that he can't argue against the message, which makes him feel uncomfortable.
Sorry, no, I don't post any "humorous homophobic" notes anywhere, and there is no HR dept at my company, and no issues of the sort, but feel free to illustrate exactly the point I was making by being "offended" that I made a scientifically sound statement you emotionally disagree with.
You illustrate poignantly why the term "asshole" is so highly subjective and ultimately meaningless.
>There is no need to be a dick in order not to talk to other people.
The problem here is, "being a dick" is highly subjective and ambiguous.
We have plenty of other, proper words to describe activities where a person more specifically, materially infringes upon another in unambiguous ways (assault, threats, libel, etc.)
So what is being an "asshole" or "dick" actually? It's almost exclusively a judgement made by 50% of those in the specific scenario. One person feels another person had emotionally disappointed them. How easy is it to go through life accomplishing greatness in any area, and at the same time making sure every single person you come in contact with, has their particular personal sensibilities pandered to?
I would also submit that a key component of "being an asshole" involves not following other peopes' desires. But if anything, this is a definition of what a pioneer is. Someone who does their own thing. If you have an associate that you want to behave a certain way, and he behaves differently, it's easy for you to paint him as an "asshole", but maybe his different way yields something that is much more valuable to the community than your acceptances of his demeanor?
>Well, if you need to offend people to exert your morals, there's something wrong with you or your work environment, no other way around it.
Not necessarily.
Let's say it's part of your morals to base your opinions on evidence, logic and reason. There are plenty of politically incorrect ideas that may offend someone that are consistent with morals being science based.
For example, there's no definitive science that says there's a "gay gene" or that people are "born gay." (one simple example of this are identical twins where one is gay and one is straight) But if you suggest sexual preference may be a behavior that is affected by environment as well as genetics, some will find that offensive.
Also, there's a difference between doing something bad to someone, and merely not living up to their expectations.
It seems the more success and influence people attain, the more vulnerable they are to others' judgement.
For example, if you see a famous person in public and you ask for their autograph, and they refuse, that can start a chain reaction reputation of them being an "asshole" because they had the audacity to not live up to your expectations.
I'm sure the story going viral had nothing to do with a relatively speedy settlement of this issue for the guy.
If only we all could get our grievances with YouTube to go viral, the other half a million people who have been shafted one way or another might get an appeal.
I don't know why people think the Model M is all that. I think the best overall keyboard, is the classic "clickly/chicklet" keyboard from IBM, the Model 8923. They're still highly sought after and last forever.
I think the paltry amount of money Uber is offering is an indication of how much they really care about the program. $500 isn't enough to motivate anybody. Black hats will laugh at the money and white hats will consider it an insult.
I remember decades ago, when a software company offered a free car to anybody who could find a bug. "A [volkswagon bug] for a bug."
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not condoning his actions in the slightest.
But you do realize what he's doing basically, Google and Facebook and many others also do every day?
A credit score doesn't monitor your real time activity.
A credit score is based on past activity and ability to pay.
It doesn't have a bearing on whether or not a particular transaction is a risk, as much as it measures the customer's ability and likelihood to honor their debts. This doesn't really apply if the user's information is being appropriated by scammers.
Interesting.
Does anybody know who's measuring this metric? Does Amazon do this? Also it seems if you use a password aggregator it could trigger this.
I'm curious what features are being added/removed?
One thing I'd like to see in a formal DNS configuration, is the ability to map an A record to a CNAME alias.
I know that some of the top level hosting companies like Cloudflare, have their own hacked DNS that adds that functionality so they can perform load balancing. In turn, they often demand complete control of the nameservers for domains they host, which I don't think is a good idea. Hopefully these changes will address this situation?
I think a dead giveaway to that was their motto: Do No Evil.
Kind of like Fox News's "Fair And Balanced."
>Yeah but who is gonna accept money if they cannot convert it to gold?
When's the last time you ever paid for anything in gold?
Gold has no value unless converted into an established, highly-regulated fiat currency that is accepted by everybody.
Go ahead and try to buy a pizza with the equivalent in gold you stupid fucking idiot.
I completely agree.
Crypto is not tangible.
Stocks represent actual equity and shares in something tangible.
While you can create companies, their share value is mapped to the tangible value of the company.
With crypto, the value of a crypto currency is completely nebulous and arbitrary. It's even less tangible than Dutch tulips or Beanie Babies. The idea that anybody would use crypto as an investment is absurd. Yes, some people are making money in crypto, just like some people make money in Ponzi schemes, but only a tiny percentage, and the overall structure of the operation is incredibly fragile and will inevitably implode. The whole crypto market is a global game of hot potato played by charlatans and fools.
> this makes BTC and similar de facto deflationary currencies.
Until they're forked, then they're inflationary.
>I'm sorry you can't accept this, but CC's will be around and your dumb ass won't be for long, lol.
Shame you're so "confident" in this "fact" you have to post anonymously.
What's wrong? Why does everybody else have to solve this problem? The invisible hand of the market has arthritis?
Cryptocurrency: Teaching libertarians the importance of regulation since 2016.
It's hard to tell who the bad guys are in this story?
This sounds like a neat idea in theory but in practice it's unlikely to work.
I can applaud the idea of a utopian society, except it's a thousand times easier to try and create one within our own society, well-integrated into the systems that are needed, than it is to completely DIY it from the ground up. The area in Nevada he's purchased is pretty miserable in any season. Hot and dry, very cold at night. The only advantage to living there is you don't need much deodorant because the environment is so hostile, not even bacteria do well.
What bothers me about this is the general mentality of wanting to separate oneself from society.. as if once you're away from all the influences you disagree with, you think you can create something better? In theory that sounds great, but in reality, you quickly find there's a very good reason society is the way it is, and one reason is because people don't work hard enough to make it better and instead would rather take their ball and go someplace else.
>it should be made clear to everyone that software engineering is not such a field. You can (and must) accomplish small things without talking to people, but to do anything of real significance communication is an essential skill.
Software engineering is indeed, such a field. You can't offend a computer. Debugging requires zero politesse.
What you're talking about, requiring significant communication skills is an entirely different discipline: marketing.
“Great spirits have always encountered opposition from mediocre minds. The mediocre mind is incapable of understanding the man who refuses to bow blindly to conventional prejudices and chooses instead to express his opinions courageously and honestly.”
Albert Einstein
>Found the guy who's been reported to HR for having 'humourous' homophobic post-it notes on his monitor.
Found the guy who has to attack the messenger in order to ignore the fact that he can't argue against the message, which makes him feel uncomfortable.
Sorry, no, I don't post any "humorous homophobic" notes anywhere, and there is no HR dept at my company, and no issues of the sort, but feel free to illustrate exactly the point I was making by being "offended" that I made a scientifically sound statement you emotionally disagree with.
You illustrate poignantly why the term "asshole" is so highly subjective and ultimately meaningless.
>There is no need to be a dick in order not to talk to other people.
The problem here is, "being a dick" is highly subjective and ambiguous.
We have plenty of other, proper words to describe activities where a person more specifically, materially infringes upon another in unambiguous ways (assault, threats, libel, etc.)
So what is being an "asshole" or "dick" actually? It's almost exclusively a judgement made by 50% of those in the specific scenario. One person feels another person had emotionally disappointed them. How easy is it to go through life accomplishing greatness in any area, and at the same time making sure every single person you come in contact with, has their particular personal sensibilities pandered to?
I would also submit that a key component of "being an asshole" involves not following other peopes' desires. But if anything, this is a definition of what a pioneer is. Someone who does their own thing. If you have an associate that you want to behave a certain way, and he behaves differently, it's easy for you to paint him as an "asshole", but maybe his different way yields something that is much more valuable to the community than your acceptances of his demeanor?
>Well, if you need to offend people to exert your morals, there's something wrong with you or your work environment, no other way around it.
Not necessarily.
Let's say it's part of your morals to base your opinions on evidence, logic and reason. There are plenty of politically incorrect ideas that may offend someone that are consistent with morals being science based.
For example, there's no definitive science that says there's a "gay gene" or that people are "born gay." (one simple example of this are identical twins where one is gay and one is straight) But if you suggest sexual preference may be a behavior that is affected by environment as well as genetics, some will find that offensive.
Also, there's a difference between doing something bad to someone, and merely not living up to their expectations.
It seems the more success and influence people attain, the more vulnerable they are to others' judgement.
For example, if you see a famous person in public and you ask for their autograph, and they refuse, that can start a chain reaction reputation of them being an "asshole" because they had the audacity to not live up to your expectations.
Who's going to secure a loan to pay back clients of a company who had shitty security, engaging in a ponzi schemes?
Google and Microsoft need to insist that they aren't monopolies.
I'm sure the story going viral had nothing to do with a relatively speedy settlement of this issue for the guy.
If only we all could get our grievances with YouTube to go viral, the other half a million people who have been shafted one way or another might get an appeal.
I don't know why people think the Model M is all that. I think the best overall keyboard, is the classic "clickly/chicklet" keyboard from IBM, the Model 8923. They're still highly sought after and last forever.
Hey on the bright side, in addition to the $500 you also get a coupon for half-off-your-first-month's LifeLok service!
I think the paltry amount of money Uber is offering is an indication of how much they really care about the program. $500 isn't enough to motivate anybody. Black hats will laugh at the money and white hats will consider it an insult.
I remember decades ago, when a software company offered a free car to anybody who could find a bug. "A [volkswagon bug] for a bug."