The root cause of current higher-education problem is government backed student loans. Why is that? Well it's fairly simple. Student loans can not be discharged by bankruptcy. In addition companies that offer student loans have little to no risk - because student loans in the US are fully backed by the government.
As a result, there is no incentive to means-check people prior to giving them a loan. In point of fact, there is very little means-checking. In addition, because of the government backing of the loan there does not need to be a correlation between what a particular degree is likely to actually pay, and how much the education might cost.
For instance, an electrical engineer could go to a university on all student loans. As long as that person gets reasonable grades, they will have decent earning potential. Another student could go to the same university and get a degree in basket weaving. It will cost them about the same. But the earning potential afterwards is nil. They are unlikely to pay back the loan.
This has led to universities charging insane amounts of money for degrees that are near worthless. We can't and shouldn't protect people from getting worthless degrees. That's their problem. We SHOULD, however, remove the liability from the taxpayer for those worthless degrees. That decoupling would result in far more stringent means-testing. It would also mean that loan companies would no longer give students loans for worthless degrees.
A college degree would be worth more. Trade-schools would likely make a return. People would be naturally funneled toward degrees that are in demand. We would be better off all the way around. Keep in mind, this is very similar to what happened to the housing market. As long as loan companies could gives loans and hide the risk they will do so. In the housing bubble's case it was through the clumping together of mortgages to hide the risk. In this case it's the government hiding the risk.
Ahh yes. Break them up immediately. It will be far easier for the giant conglomerates of Europe and Asia to purchase them or drive them out of business.
We are global now. If you think Google, Amazon, or Microsoft is the only game in town, head to China or India and you'll quickly realize you're wrong.
You are incorrect. Twitter realizes that and they will respond to Trump in as polite a manner as they can.
Do you remember the banks that were "to big to fail?" It would be VERY easy for the government to declare these communication entities as "Too influential to go unregulated". You could crow about free speech. But the government WILL win if they choose to go down that route. And eventually they will.
You are incorrect. Almost every manufacturing facility requires finished product and raw materials, and probably 80-90% of that is created in China. Purchase systems, inventory systems, these are all automatic. We build XX a day, the system automatically sends orders to our 437 suppliers to replenish those. That's the reality of lean. 3 day stock on hand if you are lucky.
The automotive manufacturing system would continue to run for a short time while the already in-transit materials were coming in. After that, nothing. Orders would not be automatically cut, shippers not automatically contacted, and there isn't a large company in the US that has even a tiny fraction of the people or manual systems in place to maintain what computers and the internet do for us automatically every day.
Everything from cell phones to automotive window motors to the jugs that manufacturers put milk and other food stuffs in (those are largely made in china, just like your bread bags and everything else we package stuff in).
You are vastly understating the issues that something like this could potentially create if it broke the internet.
Our data plans won't allow the amount of data transfer that this requires.
Most people will already blow through their phone's data allocations if they stream over it. The hotspot data? One sizeable file and you're done. Stream a couple movies? Done.
So if you are some huge data plan where you can actually USE that neat feature, cool. But how will these companies justify suddenly give people 5 or 10x the data they current do? They already say that the infrastructure is too expensive to provide what we already get.
I guess asking an honest question here is "trolling" or "foolish" and gets modded down. My mistake. We all have avenues of doing things anonymously. You can drop a package at your local newspaper if you like. Spoof your phone number and call a reporter. There are certainly ways to whistleblow that maintain your anonymity, including many 1-800 numbers that are set up for exactly that purpose.
In fact, I mentioned essentially that in the original post. I included political speech and freedom from tyranny. But don't let you stop that from calling names then basically repeating what I already said.
I was thinking about it earlier today and it occurred to me: what innovations on the internet have been furthered by anonymity? I can think of a huge number of bad-actors that are supported by it, from Credit Card thieves to hackers and even video game cheaters.
I keep coming back to what anonymity has gained us. You could make a case for political activism in dictatorial countries. Freedom of speech in those countries as well. So perhaps the problem is that I've never needed that anonymity to function like others. So let's hear it. What positive innovations or events have come to pass on the net due to it's anonymous structure?
This in no way means I support China in ANY way. I just think it's smart to realize what this anonymous access gets us that's positive. It's easy to see the negatives - right down to all those fantastic robocalls that we get with spoofed area codes and exchange numbers.
For all that is good and holy just SHUT UP. You're just guessing bullshit and trying to use your opinion to disprove scientific study!
A "small" variation can cause a cascade of effects to ripple through a complex system. Some years, because of a slightly less harsh winter, you have earlier hatching of bees, bigger colonies, and yellowjackets are a bigger pain in the ass. If you have rain at the right points during the season it can suppress honey bees and you'll have less yields of both crops and honey.
If you have a continual shift year after year even small changes add-up and flow through the system. It's the butterfly effect writ large. Go read about colony collapse disorder in bees and how complicated and confusing it is.
Read about how DDT passed through the environment.
Read about how heavy metals filter through the food change in increasing quantities until they finally settle in different species of fish - which we are told NOT to eat because we've fucked it all up so bad.
Seriously. Do really conflate your messed up opinion with science? Do you put forward conspiracy theories and hate on vaccines because of the evil Autism?
Have you ever heard of hypo or hyperthyroidism? Hypo or Hyperthermia? They are common prefixes that mean specific things in the scientific community.
If you didn't have such a lower user number I'd accuse you of being a Russian shill with the way that you're trying to use ignorance as an argument.
Insects thrive in the climate that they are adapted to. Go put a small shorthair dog outside in the winter and see if it freezes or not. Because huskies do well in the cold, ALL dogs must right?
Seriously. What's wrong with you?
This is all optics in the government's current pursuit of the pockets of the big IT corporations.
Approximately 430 people had access to the API. Google knows who those people are.
This API was for Google+. Despite reporting that glosses over the fact. Google+ is an unused wasteland where social media accounts go to die.
There is no proof, in fact not even a suggestion, that this bug was known in the wild. They've not found it on the usual suspect web pages where information like this is sold.
There is no log or data (according to Google) that it was ever exploited.
This news-event is entirely artificial and is being used to build a case. The motivation here is not to fix a problem, it's to create a bigger problem/outcry/outrage so that something else happens. It's unfortunate that the Slashdot contributors can't recognize a tempest in a teapot.
If only many of us weren't in businesses that routinely get called by people we don't know for reasons of service, warranty, or other issues.
If only many of us aren't routinely contacted by people we don't know - for instance when our kids borrow a cell phone (on our local exchange) to get ahold of us.
If only.... If only the goddamn telecom companies would block EVERY number coming from an exchange that doesn't own THAT number. It would stop the local number spoofing immediately. Seeing a area code from Utah is much easier to dismiss as not from a friend, child, or associate.
This will never get modded high enough. They understand that by working for a company, that company gets to decide how their labor is applied right?
Corporations in general have a very easy answer to people who grow morals once they start receiving that wonderful paycheck. It usually involves removing that paycheck. People can go into the whole "we need more people that stand up for good!", but in reality if you want to pull something like this you stand a good chance of not being hired in that particular field again. If you've got the financial means to not have to worry about a paycheck, then more power to you.
This just in! New face scanning technology isn't perfect, hasn't been perfectly deployed, and can still be improved. Airports are understaffed, and it's just not perfect. News at 11!
And yet equifax continues to avoid most fines. 500k euros. That's it. No US penalty. Gee, I wonder who the government favors more. A rideshare company or a financial corporation with their tentacles in literally EVERYTHING.
Kaspersky is in the pocket of the Russian government. Just as US tech companies' are in the US's pocket. Kaspersky is not better. It's just owned by a different political power.
The Chinese government has systematically banned or neutered almost every US website or website company that has won a sizeable chunk of market share in China.
At the same time, their policy on corporate ownership insures that the companies inside the great firewall are majority owned by the Chinese.
At the same time, large US companies outside of China are constantly faced by monopoly threats by the US government. They're also prevent from merging to create bigger companies. And they don't have the protection of the US goverment for the most part: they can be bought lock stock and barrel by the Chinese.
With a population that dwarves the US, Chinese companies will continue to grow larger and more powerful and will continue to snap up US companies. Their own internet will remain their own through protectionism. Startups will get purchased if they show any promise with the enormous cash reserves the chinese enjoy. And in the end there will only be ONE internet - the one owned by the Chinese. The US will be on the outside looking in.
I don't know. I'd argue that they've abdicated this authority by removing net Neutrality. And in fact I believe Pai at one point said this is not under the FCC's area of responsibility and tried to punt to the FTC. The FTC promptly told him to go fuck himself.
If the FCC and the FTC have both said "Not Responsible", then I'm perfectly fine with California stepping up and saying "Hey Feds - since you refuse to own this, we'll take it".
Unfortunately I agree the newly stacked supreme court will strike this in a second, punt it back to the federal government, and nothing will be done because according to Pai it's no one's responsibility (or at least certainly not the communication commission).
The people have lost. There's nothing we can do, other than vote out the republicans. But more and more I'm beginning to think that will never happen either, as long as Ignorance over rules reason. Here, hold my beer.
Didn't we just establish that the statements Trump made about google are flat out lies? Or perhaps you're engaging in what-aboutism. That's a favorite misdirection of political flunkies who want to scream "it may be wrong, but what about this thing wayyyyy over here".
Slashdot Mirror
The root cause of current higher-education problem is government backed student loans. Why is that? Well it's fairly simple. Student loans can not be discharged by bankruptcy. In addition companies that offer student loans have little to no risk - because student loans in the US are fully backed by the government.
As a result, there is no incentive to means-check people prior to giving them a loan. In point of fact, there is very little means-checking. In addition, because of the government backing of the loan there does not need to be a correlation between what a particular degree is likely to actually pay, and how much the education might cost.
For instance, an electrical engineer could go to a university on all student loans. As long as that person gets reasonable grades, they will have decent earning potential. Another student could go to the same university and get a degree in basket weaving. It will cost them about the same. But the earning potential afterwards is nil. They are unlikely to pay back the loan.
This has led to universities charging insane amounts of money for degrees that are near worthless. We can't and shouldn't protect people from getting worthless degrees. That's their problem. We SHOULD, however, remove the liability from the taxpayer for those worthless degrees. That decoupling would result in far more stringent means-testing. It would also mean that loan companies would no longer give students loans for worthless degrees.
A college degree would be worth more. Trade-schools would likely make a return. People would be naturally funneled toward degrees that are in demand. We would be better off all the way around. Keep in mind, this is very similar to what happened to the housing market. As long as loan companies could gives loans and hide the risk they will do so. In the housing bubble's case it was through the clumping together of mortgages to hide the risk. In this case it's the government hiding the risk.
Ahh yes. Break them up immediately. It will be far easier for the giant conglomerates of Europe and Asia to purchase them or drive them out of business.
We are global now. If you think Google, Amazon, or Microsoft is the only game in town, head to China or India and you'll quickly realize you're wrong.
It has a lot more drawbacks than that. Compressing air is incredibly inefficient. Incredibly. The starting point for their entire premise is garbage.
You are incorrect. Twitter realizes that and they will respond to Trump in as polite a manner as they can.
Do you remember the banks that were "to big to fail?" It would be VERY easy for the government to declare these communication entities as "Too influential to go unregulated". You could crow about free speech. But the government WILL win if they choose to go down that route. And eventually they will.
You are incorrect. Almost every manufacturing facility requires finished product and raw materials, and probably 80-90% of that is created in China. Purchase systems, inventory systems, these are all automatic. We build XX a day, the system automatically sends orders to our 437 suppliers to replenish those. That's the reality of lean. 3 day stock on hand if you are lucky.
The automotive manufacturing system would continue to run for a short time while the already in-transit materials were coming in. After that, nothing. Orders would not be automatically cut, shippers not automatically contacted, and there isn't a large company in the US that has even a tiny fraction of the people or manual systems in place to maintain what computers and the internet do for us automatically every day.
Everything from cell phones to automotive window motors to the jugs that manufacturers put milk and other food stuffs in (those are largely made in china, just like your bread bags and everything else we package stuff in).
You are vastly understating the issues that something like this could potentially create if it broke the internet.
Our data plans won't allow the amount of data transfer that this requires.
Most people will already blow through their phone's data allocations if they stream over it. The hotspot data? One sizeable file and you're done. Stream a couple movies? Done.
So if you are some huge data plan where you can actually USE that neat feature, cool. But how will these companies justify suddenly give people 5 or 10x the data they current do? They already say that the infrastructure is too expensive to provide what we already get.
So don't worry. We're safe....
I guess asking an honest question here is "trolling" or "foolish" and gets modded down. My mistake. We all have avenues of doing things anonymously. You can drop a package at your local newspaper if you like. Spoof your phone number and call a reporter. There are certainly ways to whistleblow that maintain your anonymity, including many 1-800 numbers that are set up for exactly that purpose.
In fact, I mentioned essentially that in the original post. I included political speech and freedom from tyranny. But don't let you stop that from calling names then basically repeating what I already said.
I was thinking about it earlier today and it occurred to me: what innovations on the internet have been furthered by anonymity? I can think of a huge number of bad-actors that are supported by it, from Credit Card thieves to hackers and even video game cheaters.
I keep coming back to what anonymity has gained us. You could make a case for political activism in dictatorial countries. Freedom of speech in those countries as well. So perhaps the problem is that I've never needed that anonymity to function like others. So let's hear it. What positive innovations or events have come to pass on the net due to it's anonymous structure?
This in no way means I support China in ANY way. I just think it's smart to realize what this anonymous access gets us that's positive. It's easy to see the negatives - right down to all those fantastic robocalls that we get with spoofed area codes and exchange numbers.
We've found our first spray-on sunscreen user.
For all that is good and holy just SHUT UP. You're just guessing bullshit and trying to use your opinion to disprove scientific study!
A "small" variation can cause a cascade of effects to ripple through a complex system. Some years, because of a slightly less harsh winter, you have earlier hatching of bees, bigger colonies, and yellowjackets are a bigger pain in the ass. If you have rain at the right points during the season it can suppress honey bees and you'll have less yields of both crops and honey.
If you have a continual shift year after year even small changes add-up and flow through the system. It's the butterfly effect writ large. Go read about colony collapse disorder in bees and how complicated and confusing it is.
Read about how DDT passed through the environment.
Read about how heavy metals filter through the food change in increasing quantities until they finally settle in different species of fish - which we are told NOT to eat because we've fucked it all up so bad.
Seriously. Do really conflate your messed up opinion with science? Do you put forward conspiracy theories and hate on vaccines because of the evil Autism?
Have you ever heard of hypo or hyperthyroidism? Hypo or Hyperthermia? They are common prefixes that mean specific things in the scientific community. If you didn't have such a lower user number I'd accuse you of being a Russian shill with the way that you're trying to use ignorance as an argument. Insects thrive in the climate that they are adapted to. Go put a small shorthair dog outside in the winter and see if it freezes or not. Because huskies do well in the cold, ALL dogs must right? Seriously. What's wrong with you?
This is all optics in the government's current pursuit of the pockets of the big IT corporations.
Approximately 430 people had access to the API. Google knows who those people are.
This API was for Google+. Despite reporting that glosses over the fact. Google+ is an unused wasteland where social media accounts go to die.
There is no proof, in fact not even a suggestion, that this bug was known in the wild. They've not found it on the usual suspect web pages where information like this is sold.
There is no log or data (according to Google) that it was ever exploited.
This news-event is entirely artificial and is being used to build a case. The motivation here is not to fix a problem, it's to create a bigger problem/outcry/outrage so that something else happens. It's unfortunate that the Slashdot contributors can't recognize a tempest in a teapot.
If only many of us weren't in businesses that routinely get called by people we don't know for reasons of service, warranty, or other issues.
If only many of us aren't routinely contacted by people we don't know - for instance when our kids borrow a cell phone (on our local exchange) to get ahold of us.
If only.... If only the goddamn telecom companies would block EVERY number coming from an exchange that doesn't own THAT number. It would stop the local number spoofing immediately. Seeing a area code from Utah is much easier to dismiss as not from a friend, child, or associate.
This will never get modded high enough. They understand that by working for a company, that company gets to decide how their labor is applied right?
Corporations in general have a very easy answer to people who grow morals once they start receiving that wonderful paycheck. It usually involves removing that paycheck. People can go into the whole "we need more people that stand up for good!", but in reality if you want to pull something like this you stand a good chance of not being hired in that particular field again. If you've got the financial means to not have to worry about a paycheck, then more power to you.
And do they also lay out that they may demand to know your GPS location?
Let's make it simple. Cancel them and go elsewhere. That's the only way to get corporations to pay attention.
This just in! New face scanning technology isn't perfect, hasn't been perfectly deployed, and can still be improved. Airports are understaffed, and it's just not perfect. News at 11!
And yet equifax continues to avoid most fines. 500k euros. That's it. No US penalty. Gee, I wonder who the government favors more. A rideshare company or a financial corporation with their tentacles in literally EVERYTHING.
Kaspersky is in the pocket of the Russian government. Just as US tech companies' are in the US's pocket. Kaspersky is not better. It's just owned by a different political power.
The Chinese government has systematically banned or neutered almost every US website or website company that has won a sizeable chunk of market share in China.
At the same time, their policy on corporate ownership insures that the companies inside the great firewall are majority owned by the Chinese.
At the same time, large US companies outside of China are constantly faced by monopoly threats by the US government. They're also prevent from merging to create bigger companies. And they don't have the protection of the US goverment for the most part: they can be bought lock stock and barrel by the Chinese.
With a population that dwarves the US, Chinese companies will continue to grow larger and more powerful and will continue to snap up US companies. Their own internet will remain their own through protectionism. Startups will get purchased if they show any promise with the enormous cash reserves the chinese enjoy. And in the end there will only be ONE internet - the one owned by the Chinese. The US will be on the outside looking in.
Inefficient software and environmental harm.
How about pointless software and total environmental harm? I believe they call it "cryptocurrency mining" in more polite circles.
I don't know. I'd argue that they've abdicated this authority by removing net Neutrality. And in fact I believe Pai at one point said this is not under the FCC's area of responsibility and tried to punt to the FTC. The FTC promptly told him to go fuck himself.
If the FCC and the FTC have both said "Not Responsible", then I'm perfectly fine with California stepping up and saying "Hey Feds - since you refuse to own this, we'll take it".
Unfortunately I agree the newly stacked supreme court will strike this in a second, punt it back to the federal government, and nothing will be done because according to Pai it's no one's responsibility (or at least certainly not the communication commission).
The people have lost. There's nothing we can do, other than vote out the republicans. But more and more I'm beginning to think that will never happen either, as long as Ignorance over rules reason. Here, hold my beer.
MAGA right?
They're just trying to move people off legacy office. 5 years from now this will go away and it'll be one license one user.
Wow. Overreact much? Nevermind that the US is way behind the curve on this. People can choose not to do business with Microsoft if they don't like.
I don't know what reality you live in, but you must be really lonely there. It sure as hell doesn't reflect the vast majority of Americans.
Didn't we just establish that the statements Trump made about google are flat out lies? Or perhaps you're engaging in what-aboutism. That's a favorite misdirection of political flunkies who want to scream "it may be wrong, but what about this thing wayyyyy over here".
Which is it?