So the Catholics had it right all along? Every sperm is sacred? Wasting it won't so much make you blind as make you wish you were so you don't have to look at your mutated kids?
Regardless of anyone's summation of cultures, has anyone ever been part of a large corporate acquisition that was a success? I mean, some do work to some degree, but in my experience, after about 6 months it's hard to find more than a handful of the "new intake" anywhere. If you're not buying a load of unmanageable legacy systems, antiquated production lines and a customer list of low-paying, high maintenance clients, then you don't get to keep much after the brains leave the building.
Of course, the Internet does still have the obscure, quirky and interesting, you just need to look for it.
...and that's part of what she's saying, but she probably doesn't realise it. The weird and quirky is indeed available, but it's too hard to find. The 'front doors' to the Internet (Google, etc) are all far too biassed towards the commercial end of things, so finding that one page of 'gold' information gets harder and harder. Thus too, that small business with some weird niche doesn't get the same (relative) exposure it once would have done.
Like most people knew that western governments were doing some spying on their own people too. However, seeing the actual documents, the details of how and when and what for - that's what's interesting.
What if the Trump-leakers decided to contact Fox or WSJ instead of Wikileaks? How would Wikileaks be able to publish that information? It's not like they magically get a copy of every document accidentally left on a train, or quietly spoken to a contact on while hiding in a cupboard at work.
Back in the day, Altavista or Yahoo or whomever used to show you a glorified 'grep' of the Internet. That ended up being a pretty poor experience because fledgling SEO hacks were promoting irrelevant content over more useful stuff. Then Google showed up, and did a far better job of it with their PageRank algorithm. Nowadays we're back to the 'noise' era of old, with a much bigger Internet and far more well funded, well motivated 'SEO hackers'. We need a new algorithm, but the barriers to entry for any new company are huge, and the algorithm hasn't yet been discovered/proven (and if it was, Google could probably implement it quite quickly before any competitor got any market share).
...although they could just be fiddling with the 'settings' for your search experience - they don't need data retention to do that - they can do it incrementally as you search/browse or whatever.
Retention is useful (for them) because they can look for new patterns they don't have 'settings' for yet. They can also pigeon-hole you into new categories that they can sell to advertisers.
I suspect we'd be more ready for a VR-world where we can meet people instead of going there physically. Video conferences are getting so good that they're worth it for quick meetings as well as long ones. It's not a huge leap to think we could 'VR' that experience up a bit (although VR headgear needs to improve somewhat, it seems like that'll happen sooner than we'll figure out the bajillion issues we'd need to solve to have 1 flying car, let alone thousands of them).
Are we ready for a VR 'meeting place'? Probably not, at least not really, although at least we get to try them out without risking anyone's life.
Sounds like typical Samsung bullshit to me. They just can't do software, no matter how hard they try.
As for disabling the button - everyone should do this. You can bet they get telemetry about it, so when they see 30% of all users disable the button, they might start thinking about what their main 'selling points' are.
...and indeed national banks are doing the same development. Having a Bank of England backed crypto-currency is pretty much going to be the same as having pounds in your pocket, or pounds lodged in a retail bank + a plastic card. If Ethereum became the technology of choice for any national bank, it could indeed see vast transaction volumes.
However... and there's a big but here. The reason current crypto currencies are working is because they're decentralised and international. Once they become centralised, and tied to a nation they stop being international in the same way. They also lose most of their 'value' because they're exactly like retail bank + plastic card again.
There's a paradox which needs solving here. It'll be solved by having exchanges which are national-bank backed, in much the same was as retail banks are national-bank backed. For example, here in the UK I can put something like £70K into any bank - if the bank fails, or is robbed or whatever, I get my 70K back from the Bank of England - I'm told it would only take a couple of weeks. If I put £100 into a UK-based crypto-exchange and the exchange is hacked, or goes out of business, I lose my £100 - until someone's prepared to take some or all of that risk for me, crypto currencies just won't have the same 'penetration' as national currencies. Whomever solves this will 'own' the crypto-currency world over most others (if volume of transactions is your measure of success). I'm looking forward to them all fighting it out in the next few years though...
No country, or representative shall call us ninnies, nincompoops, or smelly-pants, either in public or in closed session. Further, no mention shall be made about the current President's hands, size, shape or general nature thereof. Indeed, any mention of the United States progress with respect to the accord shall be suffixed with a statement of "the greatest ever, I'm sure of it, period!".
Sounds great, until an honest mistake is made and needs to be rectified. In the current system, there's an override that allows us to correct mistakes such that they aren't visible and don't bias any reader's view of the information their reading. Making a system too indelible will marginalise a minority, not for actions they've ever taken, but for actions someone else took, potentially many years ago.
None of that means this is a bad idea, but it doesn't make it a good one either.
There's a big difference between putting your hardware in a secured datacentre somewhere on the edge of town to putting lots of little bits of your datacentre in people's houses - people you have no relationship with, other than they're using your product.
For all you know, your competitors could be buying your product specifically to tamper with the results of your computations to f'up you business. That isn't a concern if you use a traditional datacentre, even if it's one shared with your competitors.
The UK government recently stated that the sale of all non-hybrid cars would be stopped after 2040. During the ensuing news round-up and debate, it transpired that using a bit of battery to save the fuel while idling (ie. 'stop at the lights, but restart the engine to pull away') could be considered 'hybrid' in so much as it's not 100% hydrocarbon and using electrical power to fill the 'gaps'. It turns out that the industry calls this "micro hybrid", and indeed there are numerous varieties of implementation with a range of electrical involvement (http://www.hybridcars.com/stop-start-primer-not-all-systems-are-created-equal/).
Actually, a lot of legal stuff is made as easy as possible (at least here in the UK) - but the legal profession makes it sound harder than it is (not that they're making it deliberately difficult). There are plenty of cases where 'ordinary person doing the legals' is considered a problem though, but I suspect that's because so much of it is not automated.
As for automation failing at the margin - I'd agree, but just because it's hard in some cases doesn't mean the majority can't be easy. Like a self-driving car should safely pull over if it's not able to handle the situation, so should lawyer-bot (although lawyer-bot should just be able to refer the case to a human who can either take it from there to completion, or just give the bot enough information to proceed).
Slashdot Mirror
So they'll be making nicer looking cars now, will they? No? oh :-(
So the Catholics had it right all along? Every sperm is sacred? Wasting it won't so much make you blind as make you wish you were so you don't have to look at your mutated kids?
Regardless of anyone's summation of cultures, has anyone ever been part of a large corporate acquisition that was a success? I mean, some do work to some degree, but in my experience, after about 6 months it's hard to find more than a handful of the "new intake" anywhere. If you're not buying a load of unmanageable legacy systems, antiquated production lines and a customer list of low-paying, high maintenance clients, then you don't get to keep much after the brains leave the building.
As usual, someone misinterprets data for their own personal agenda.
Exactly like this mathematical model - it's not based on facts, it's based on interpretation of facts.
"Alexa! This meeting is really boring - Turn on fake eyes so I can go to sleep without anyone knowing"
Of course, the Internet does still have the obscure, quirky and interesting, you just need to look for it.
...and that's part of what she's saying, but she probably doesn't realise it. The weird and quirky is indeed available, but it's too hard to find. The 'front doors' to the Internet (Google, etc) are all far too biassed towards the commercial end of things, so finding that one page of 'gold' information gets harder and harder. Thus too, that small business with some weird niche doesn't get the same (relative) exposure it once would have done.
Like most people knew that western governments were doing some spying on their own people too. However, seeing the actual documents, the details of how and when and what for - that's what's interesting.
You'd think, if you were trying to set up a 'front' that you'd find someone 'better' than Assange to lead it ;-)
What if the Trump-leakers decided to contact Fox or WSJ instead of Wikileaks? How would Wikileaks be able to publish that information? It's not like they magically get a copy of every document accidentally left on a train, or quietly spoken to a contact on while hiding in a cupboard at work.
"the noise" is a failing of the search engine.
Back in the day, Altavista or Yahoo or whomever used to show you a glorified 'grep' of the Internet. That ended up being a pretty poor experience because fledgling SEO hacks were promoting irrelevant content over more useful stuff. Then Google showed up, and did a far better job of it with their PageRank algorithm. Nowadays we're back to the 'noise' era of old, with a much bigger Internet and far more well funded, well motivated 'SEO hackers'. We need a new algorithm, but the barriers to entry for any new company are huge, and the algorithm hasn't yet been discovered/proven (and if it was, Google could probably implement it quite quickly before any competitor got any market share).
So yeah... ultimately, blame Google ;-)
...although they could just be fiddling with the 'settings' for your search experience - they don't need data retention to do that - they can do it incrementally as you search/browse or whatever.
Retention is useful (for them) because they can look for new patterns they don't have 'settings' for yet. They can also pigeon-hole you into new categories that they can sell to advertisers.
I suspect we'd be more ready for a VR-world where we can meet people instead of going there physically. Video conferences are getting so good that they're worth it for quick meetings as well as long ones. It's not a huge leap to think we could 'VR' that experience up a bit (although VR headgear needs to improve somewhat, it seems like that'll happen sooner than we'll figure out the bajillion issues we'd need to solve to have 1 flying car, let alone thousands of them).
Are we ready for a VR 'meeting place'? Probably not, at least not really, although at least we get to try them out without risking anyone's life.
Sylvester Stallone - Demolition Man
(swears at the machine so it gives him some paper tickets, which he takes to the toilet)
Sounds like typical Samsung bullshit to me. They just can't do software, no matter how hard they try.
As for disabling the button - everyone should do this. You can bet they get telemetry about it, so when they see 30% of all users disable the button, they might start thinking about what their main 'selling points' are.
With those APR rates, you'd have to be seriously stupid to leave money on an amex card. So yeah, it's a charge-card.
...and indeed national banks are doing the same development. Having a Bank of England backed crypto-currency is pretty much going to be the same as having pounds in your pocket, or pounds lodged in a retail bank + a plastic card. If Ethereum became the technology of choice for any national bank, it could indeed see vast transaction volumes.
However... and there's a big but here. The reason current crypto currencies are working is because they're decentralised and international. Once they become centralised, and tied to a nation they stop being international in the same way. They also lose most of their 'value' because they're exactly like retail bank + plastic card again.
There's a paradox which needs solving here. It'll be solved by having exchanges which are national-bank backed, in much the same was as retail banks are national-bank backed. For example, here in the UK I can put something like £70K into any bank - if the bank fails, or is robbed or whatever, I get my 70K back from the Bank of England - I'm told it would only take a couple of weeks. If I put £100 into a UK-based crypto-exchange and the exchange is hacked, or goes out of business, I lose my £100 - until someone's prepared to take some or all of that risk for me, crypto currencies just won't have the same 'penetration' as national currencies. Whomever solves this will 'own' the crypto-currency world over most others (if volume of transactions is your measure of success). I'm looking forward to them all fighting it out in the next few years though...
LOL - your post made me laugh so much I lost a bit of my lunch onto my monitor. You'll go far, son.
There'd have to be a clause that states:
No country, or representative shall call us ninnies, nincompoops, or smelly-pants, either in public or in closed session. Further, no mention shall be made about the current President's hands, size, shape or general nature thereof. Indeed, any mention of the United States progress with respect to the accord shall be suffixed with a statement of "the greatest ever, I'm sure of it, period!".
Yeah, problem is, no one on /. ever heard that one, so we can't comment ;-)
Sounds great, until an honest mistake is made and needs to be rectified. In the current system, there's an override that allows us to correct mistakes such that they aren't visible and don't bias any reader's view of the information their reading. Making a system too indelible will marginalise a minority, not for actions they've ever taken, but for actions someone else took, potentially many years ago.
None of that means this is a bad idea, but it doesn't make it a good one either.
There's a big difference between putting your hardware in a secured datacentre somewhere on the edge of town to putting lots of little bits of your datacentre in people's houses - people you have no relationship with, other than they're using your product.
For all you know, your competitors could be buying your product specifically to tamper with the results of your computations to f'up you business. That isn't a concern if you use a traditional datacentre, even if it's one shared with your competitors.
Yes, start-stop is 'hybrid' - https://www.carsdirect.com/gre...
So, it seems you're the idiot because you can't use the Internet.
The UK government recently stated that the sale of all non-hybrid cars would be stopped after 2040. During the ensuing news round-up and debate, it transpired that using a bit of battery to save the fuel while idling (ie. 'stop at the lights, but restart the engine to pull away') could be considered 'hybrid' in so much as it's not 100% hydrocarbon and using electrical power to fill the 'gaps'. It turns out that the industry calls this "micro hybrid", and indeed there are numerous varieties of implementation with a range of electrical involvement (http://www.hybridcars.com/stop-start-primer-not-all-systems-are-created-equal/).
So yes, hybrid does mean what I think it does.
Actually, a lot of legal stuff is made as easy as possible (at least here in the UK) - but the legal profession makes it sound harder than it is (not that they're making it deliberately difficult). There are plenty of cases where 'ordinary person doing the legals' is considered a problem though, but I suspect that's because so much of it is not automated.
As for automation failing at the margin - I'd agree, but just because it's hard in some cases doesn't mean the majority can't be easy. Like a self-driving car should safely pull over if it's not able to handle the situation, so should lawyer-bot (although lawyer-bot should just be able to refer the case to a human who can either take it from there to completion, or just give the bot enough information to proceed).
Looks like that domain's been taken already. equifaxsecuritysucks.com is still free though ;-)