I think #3 would be more accurately listed as "Those who want to government to enforce network neutrality, and think using Title II is better than doing nothing at all."
That would make sense when arguing against repealing the Title II network neutrality rules. Now that they have been repealed, the question would be "Why re-instate Title II when you can introduce new legislation to authorize the FCC to regulate last-mile broadband properly?"
The FCC originally tried to regulate network neutrality by declaring high speed internet to be under the same regulatory regime as cable television. This didn't work out for a variety of reasons. So the FCC switched to classify high speed internet as a phone service. This suited large ISPs well, but small ISPs find it difficult to comply with the more arcane regulations that come with, and there are some other less visible side effects as well.
So there are actually have three camps:
1. Those who don't want the government to regulate high speed internet at all 2. Those who want the government to enforce network neutrality, but don't think that classifying it as a phone service is the right way to do it 3. Those who want to regulate network neutrality as a phone service.
I find it interesting, and somewhat telling, that the Democrats are passing a law to re-instate the Title II network neutrality regulation, instead of a crafting a bill that would allow the FCC to regulate *only* high speed internet as a distinct service from telephone.
But we both know the process is "cumbersome" because of the FDA, not your company.
Yeah, our company automates that part. It's basically a workflow/compliance package that handles all the submission requirements, scheduling and data gathering (which it pulls in from your existing systems.) The end user never sees the awful Java applet.
In my neck of the woods, most of the IT companies focus on manufacturing. Their main innovations are in controls, resource planning, quality control, logistics, etc... These innovations, from the outside, are totally opaque and probably pretty boring to most end-users. However, they mean that stores can easily get the products they need to sell, stuff is easier to make, cheaper to build, and of higher quality.
The company I work for, for instance, makes software to automate regulatory filings with the FDA, which is an incredibly cumbersome process. The only electronic filing method, for instance, is formatting data using a custom XML DTD into separate files, zipping them together in a specific directory format, then uploading it, manually, via a Java 2 *swing* based desktop application.
Everyone has the right to water. Everyone does *not* have the *right* to have water pumped, purified, then transported to wherever they wish to live. Someone has to pay for that. The people who should pay are those who use it.
If there is no more water to be had in a particular area, and nobody wants to pay to get water delivered there, then you're going to have to move somewhere there is water.
Decorate a house: Since some design elements are expected to hold loads, or not fall down on people, they need to know enough to design "safe" decorations.
Any change to a house that involves load bearing structures needs a permit pulled and sign-off by an inspector, in most municipalities. They don't care who does the work, but it gets inspected.
Sell caskets: States have a lot of rules when it comes to putting bodies in the ground. A casket needs to be sturdy enough that it won't be crushed when you put 6 feet of dirt on it, or rot when you expose it to years of damp soil and insects.
That's why the regulation now is to put the casket in a cement vault. The construction of the casket doesn't make a difference anymore. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Upholster furniture: There are fire codes that have to be followed when you upholster/stuff furniture.
So you buy fire retardant upholstery. Not sure how licensing needs to be involved.
Some people have argued that licensing for hair braiding involves health regulations. The regulation is that you need to wash your hands in between sessions. Is a license required for this level of training?
At some point you are correct. There are certain professions that should require licensing. Generally these are professions that involve some level of personal safety (medical) or fiduciary responsibility (legal.)
At some point your argument falls apart. Not exactly sure why you need to be licensed to:
Decorate a house Braid hair (NOT cut it) Walk dogs Sell caskets Be a locksmith Run a pawn broker Run a flower shop Operate a food truck (ON TOP of your regular commercial drivers license AND health certificate) Install home theater equipment Run a travel agency Package things for shipping Upholster furniture
I'm sure you could come up with some corner case that would involve safety in any of these cases, but you could do the same for, pretty much, ANY profession.
So the question becomes is if the licensing scheme is doing more to protect consumers, or to protect established professionals from competition.
Moreover, there's tons of evidence these chemicals are bad for you.
Everything is bad for you in the correct dose. Most vitamins and minerals your body needs to function are toxic in high doses. The question isn't if they are bad for you, the question is if they have some sort of negative impact on your health in low doses.
The overwhelming evidence for the majority of additives and preservatives is that they are safe in the levels found in processed foods.
You can choose to deny this evidence, or believe some health guru when he pulls out one (shoddy) study that shows some preservative causes cancer when there are dozens of studies showing it does not. Read up on p-value hacking for more on that. But you would be using the same logic that climate change deniers, young earth creationists, and flat earthers use to defend their positions. Instead of looking at the majority of the evidence and basing your conclusions on that, you are rejecting said evidence based on preconceived notions and buying into whatever evidence you can find to fit into your narrative.
* Inexpensive microinverters for solar panels. (price fixing?)
Nope, efficient inverters are expensive to build. You need a very high quality 1:10 transformer, which means tight tolerances, which means expensive manufacturing. If you can find a way to quickly and precisely wind transformer coils (and probably the ferrite cores) then you can have a cheap inverter.
A box I put in my basement with a bunch of hard drives. I turn it on and configure a couple of things via a web UI. I download clients onto all of my devices and aim them at the box, and they all automatically get backed up. I open a port on my router and my phones/laptop/tablets do incremental backups OTA via encrypted tunnel. The box has a couple of removable drives I can swap out and keep off site. There's an option to mirror in the cloud - encrypted on my side, for a nominal fee.
There are things that do some of the above for some devices. There isn't anything that I know of that does them all for every device.
What censorship? They didn't pull his videos, and he's free to say whatever he wants in his videos, it's just that Google doesn't want to pay him anymore for the type of videos he's making.
It's more along the lines of, Google doesn't want advertisers to be able to put their ads on his channel. Maybe there are advertisers who would love to put their ads on his channel. Now they can't.
I've seen Youtube channels that have been demonetized that now do their own native ads, so advertisers definitely support some of them. If that trend continues, I can see Youtube banning that practice as well.
Seems simple to me. SCADA systems shouldn't be controllable over the internet, or by anything connected to the internet. For remote control used leased lines. Hardly anyone uses ISDN or leased 56k lines anymore, so there's an easy solution.
For monitoring, you can have an internet connected data logger wired into the SCADA system with a serial port. Even if someone manages to hack into the data logger, you can't take over the SCADA system if it's not designed to accept commands over serial.
I worked for a broadcast company that operated this way. The broadcast equipment could only be controlled by standing in front of the machine, or via a single hardwired remote terminal in the operations room that wans't connected to anything else. It spit out a bunch of system status data over a serial port to an network connected machine, but you couldn't control it that way.
Or, we can take a look at the design of the thing a do a little critical thinking.
Most bluetooth speakers have one speaker aiming forward or up. So they sound OK if you are in front of a front-firing speaker, or mediocre if you are near an upward-firing speaker. We have a Riva X that has three speakers in an angled array, so if it's against a wall it fills the room pretty well.
The Apple device has speakers surrounding it, which is the design you want if you want to be able to place it anywhere in a room. I've seen a commercial Bose ceiling speaker system that has an array of speakers around it to fill the area with sound, and it works pretty well for that application.
So, from a design perspective, it makes more sense than an upward firing speaker or a front firing speaker, if the application is 'throw it anywhere.'
C'mon. HiFi has been around since the 1950's. It doesn't take six years for a multi-billion dollar company to R&D good sound.
Getting good sound by sitting between two medium to large-sized speakers properly located (rule of 3rds) and toed in is easy. Getting good sound from a small cylinder placed arbitrarily in a room is difficult.
1. They tried to write big chunks of it in.NET which wasn't quite a mature framework yet, and... 2. They tried to component-ize everything into discreet, independent modules, and once they brought all of the modules together to compile as one coherent OS, it failed miserably
They are still trying to do step #2 - witness the ARM based windows they are still working on, and Windows running on the XBox One, etc..
So it's been 40 years. He hasn't been caught. How many times has this been tried since then? There have been hijackings since then, which has led to increased security. I don't think finding DB Cooper is going to dissuade anyone from going after a plane if they are crazy or dumb enough to try.
So the rate of brain cancer going down tells us that either there's no correlation OR that the decrease in power, coupled with increased use of hands-free devices, headphones, and speakerphone modes has roughly balanced out the increase in usage.
Excellent point. Another confounding factor is, as far as cancers go, brain cancer is pretty rare. I think it's something like 6 or 7 per 100,000, as opposed to 120 in 100,000 for breast and prostate cancers. So small increases or decreases in the rate are nearly indistinguishable from "noise," statistically speaking.
The main take-away is, even if you assume all brain cancer is cell phone related, if you are concerned with a 0.006% chance of getting cancer from a cell phone, you probably don't want to step foot in a car or go anywhere near a swimming pool, as you are much, *MUCH* more likely to die from those two things than a cell phone.
Cell phone usage has increased by over an order of magnitude between 1992 and 2014 in the US.
The rate of brain cancer diagnoses has slightly decreased in the same time span.
Some studies take 'liberties' with the statistics and say that there is an increase, but they are usually separating out categories of cancers, which get shuffled around from time to time, to say that one category has increased without mentioning that another has decreased or has been eliminated entirely.
CO2 emissions from rotting plant matter are minimal. Most of the carbon is gobbled up by the bacteria, mold and bugs that are eating the dead plants. A tree will take in far more CO2 during it's lifespan than it will emit after dying.
I think that, maybe, the OP wants to stream a playlist *once* then stop. My kids would watch their favorite shows over and over again. So the playlist needs a tiny bit of intelligence.
Only way I can think to do this, without hacking up a custom Plex plugin, would be setting up a time limit. Maybe a tinydlna server brought up by a cron job, then another job that kills it after two hours or so?
GM built it's own battery factory. Practically nobody knows about it. They make all of their own battery packs for their hybrid and pure EV vehicles. It came on-line on time and roughly at capacity.
GM hasn't run a large-scale battery operation like this but it managed to figure it out. Building the factory in an area already saturated with large factory operations probably helped out a bit. Building a factory in the middle of the desert, where the nearest, largest factory builds slot machines, probably is a hindrance.
Even if you are house owner you can easily understand what this means : imagine your house which had a monthly cost of 600$-700$ (inflation adjusted cost) now has a monthly average cost of 4000$.
The cost would only go up if you were renting. There are usually caps on property tax increases to avoid things like that happening to homeowners. Even if property taxes shot up, you could rent out your house for a bunch of money to make up for it. You'd have to move, but if rents are that high you could probably pay off the mortgage pretty quickly that way.
If you owned your house you could sell it for a tidy profit, or keep it as you saw fit. If you don't own your own house, you can't really complain about rent increasing as it's not your house.
Slashdot Mirror
I think #3 would be more accurately listed as "Those who want to government to enforce network neutrality, and think using Title II is better than doing nothing at all."
That would make sense when arguing against repealing the Title II network neutrality rules. Now that they have been repealed, the question would be "Why re-instate Title II when you can introduce new legislation to authorize the FCC to regulate last-mile broadband properly?"
What do you think will happen at the end of Trump's second term?
That's what Republicans said about Bill Clinton. That's what Democrats said about George W. Bush. That's what Republicans said about Barack Obama.
I guess it's a "scary" question if you are too young to remember all the other times people have asked it.
Cliffs notes version:
The FCC originally tried to regulate network neutrality by declaring high speed internet to be under the same regulatory regime as cable television. This didn't work out for a variety of reasons. So the FCC switched to classify high speed internet as a phone service. This suited large ISPs well, but small ISPs find it difficult to comply with the more arcane regulations that come with, and there are some other less visible side effects as well.
So there are actually have three camps:
1. Those who don't want the government to regulate high speed internet at all
2. Those who want the government to enforce network neutrality, but don't think that classifying it as a phone service is the right way to do it
3. Those who want to regulate network neutrality as a phone service.
I find it interesting, and somewhat telling, that the Democrats are passing a law to re-instate the Title II network neutrality regulation, instead of a crafting a bill that would allow the FCC to regulate *only* high speed internet as a distinct service from telephone.
But we both know the process is "cumbersome" because of the FDA, not your company.
Yeah, our company automates that part. It's basically a workflow/compliance package that handles all the submission requirements, scheduling and data gathering (which it pulls in from your existing systems.) The end user never sees the awful Java applet.
In my neck of the woods, most of the IT companies focus on manufacturing. Their main innovations are in controls, resource planning, quality control, logistics, etc... These innovations, from the outside, are totally opaque and probably pretty boring to most end-users. However, they mean that stores can easily get the products they need to sell, stuff is easier to make, cheaper to build, and of higher quality.
The company I work for, for instance, makes software to automate regulatory filings with the FDA, which is an incredibly cumbersome process. The only electronic filing method, for instance, is formatting data using a custom XML DTD into separate files, zipping them together in a specific directory format, then uploading it, manually, via a Java 2 *swing* based desktop application.
Everyone has the right to water. Everyone does *not* have the *right* to have water pumped, purified, then transported to wherever they wish to live. Someone has to pay for that. The people who should pay are those who use it.
If there is no more water to be had in a particular area, and nobody wants to pay to get water delivered there, then you're going to have to move somewhere there is water.
Decorate a house: Since some design elements are expected to hold loads, or not fall down on people, they need to know enough to design "safe" decorations.
Any change to a house that involves load bearing structures needs a permit pulled and sign-off by an inspector, in most municipalities. They don't care who does the work, but it gets inspected.
Sell caskets: States have a lot of rules when it comes to putting bodies in the ground. A casket needs to be sturdy enough that it won't be crushed when you put 6 feet of dirt on it, or rot when you expose it to years of damp soil and insects.
That's why the regulation now is to put the casket in a cement vault. The construction of the casket doesn't make a difference anymore.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Upholster furniture: There are fire codes that have to be followed when you upholster/stuff furniture.
So you buy fire retardant upholstery. Not sure how licensing needs to be involved.
Some people have argued that licensing for hair braiding involves health regulations. The regulation is that you need to wash your hands in between sessions. Is a license required for this level of training?
At some point you are correct. There are certain professions that should require licensing. Generally these are professions that involve some level of personal safety (medical) or fiduciary responsibility (legal.)
At some point your argument falls apart. Not exactly sure why you need to be licensed to:
Decorate a house
Braid hair (NOT cut it)
Walk dogs
Sell caskets
Be a locksmith
Run a pawn broker
Run a flower shop
Operate a food truck (ON TOP of your regular commercial drivers license AND health certificate)
Install home theater equipment
Run a travel agency
Package things for shipping
Upholster furniture
I'm sure you could come up with some corner case that would involve safety in any of these cases, but you could do the same for, pretty much, ANY profession.
So the question becomes is if the licensing scheme is doing more to protect consumers, or to protect established professionals from competition.
You don't know the difference between your opinion and evidence?
https://www.webmd.com/diet/fea...
Benzyl Alcohol, Benzoic Acid, and Sodium Benzoate are safe:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p...
Azodicarbonamide is safe:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p...
Aspartame is safe:
https://jamanetwork.com/journa...
No evidence that organic based foods are safer than regular foods (a review of 240 studies)
http://annals.org/aim/article-...
No evidence that GMOs pose health risks:
https://www.csicop.org/si/show...
What is actually going on here:
https://sciencebasedmedicine.o...
Moreover, there's tons of evidence these chemicals are bad for you.
Everything is bad for you in the correct dose. Most vitamins and minerals your body needs to function are toxic in high doses. The question isn't if they are bad for you, the question is if they have some sort of negative impact on your health in low doses.
The overwhelming evidence for the majority of additives and preservatives is that they are safe in the levels found in processed foods.
You can choose to deny this evidence, or believe some health guru when he pulls out one (shoddy) study that shows some preservative causes cancer when there are dozens of studies showing it does not. Read up on p-value hacking for more on that. But you would be using the same logic that climate change deniers, young earth creationists, and flat earthers use to defend their positions. Instead of looking at the majority of the evidence and basing your conclusions on that, you are rejecting said evidence based on preconceived notions and buying into whatever evidence you can find to fit into your narrative.
Since when does the NSA run human intelligence operations? I guess when your budget is classified you can just do whatever the hell you want.
* Inexpensive microinverters for solar panels. (price fixing?)
Nope, efficient inverters are expensive to build. You need a very high quality 1:10 transformer, which means tight tolerances, which means expensive manufacturing. If you can find a way to quickly and precisely wind transformer coils (and probably the ferrite cores) then you can have a cheap inverter.
A box I put in my basement with a bunch of hard drives. I turn it on and configure a couple of things via a web UI. I download clients onto all of my devices and aim them at the box, and they all automatically get backed up. I open a port on my router and my phones/laptop/tablets do incremental backups OTA via encrypted tunnel. The box has a couple of removable drives I can swap out and keep off site. There's an option to mirror in the cloud - encrypted on my side, for a nominal fee.
There are things that do some of the above for some devices. There isn't anything that I know of that does them all for every device.
What censorship? They didn't pull his videos, and he's free to say whatever he wants in his videos, it's just that Google doesn't want to pay him anymore for the type of videos he's making.
It's more along the lines of, Google doesn't want advertisers to be able to put their ads on his channel. Maybe there are advertisers who would love to put their ads on his channel. Now they can't.
I've seen Youtube channels that have been demonetized that now do their own native ads, so advertisers definitely support some of them. If that trend continues, I can see Youtube banning that practice as well.
Seems simple to me. SCADA systems shouldn't be controllable over the internet, or by anything connected to the internet. For remote control used leased lines. Hardly anyone uses ISDN or leased 56k lines anymore, so there's an easy solution.
For monitoring, you can have an internet connected data logger wired into the SCADA system with a serial port. Even if someone manages to hack into the data logger, you can't take over the SCADA system if it's not designed to accept commands over serial.
I worked for a broadcast company that operated this way. The broadcast equipment could only be controlled by standing in front of the machine, or via a single hardwired remote terminal in the operations room that wans't connected to anything else. It spit out a bunch of system status data over a serial port to an network connected machine, but you couldn't control it that way.
Or, we can take a look at the design of the thing a do a little critical thinking.
Most bluetooth speakers have one speaker aiming forward or up. So they sound OK if you are in front of a front-firing speaker, or mediocre if you are near an upward-firing speaker. We have a Riva X that has three speakers in an angled array, so if it's against a wall it fills the room pretty well.
The Apple device has speakers surrounding it, which is the design you want if you want to be able to place it anywhere in a room. I've seen a commercial Bose ceiling speaker system that has an array of speakers around it to fill the area with sound, and it works pretty well for that application.
So, from a design perspective, it makes more sense than an upward firing speaker or a front firing speaker, if the application is 'throw it anywhere.'
C'mon. HiFi has been around since the 1950's. It doesn't take six years for a multi-billion dollar company to R&D good sound.
Getting good sound by sitting between two medium to large-sized speakers properly located (rule of 3rds) and toed in is easy. Getting good sound from a small cylinder placed arbitrarily in a room is difficult.
From what I remember:
1. They tried to write big chunks of it in .NET which wasn't quite a mature framework yet, and...
2. They tried to component-ize everything into discreet, independent modules, and once they brought all of the modules together to compile as one coherent OS, it failed miserably
They are still trying to do step #2 - witness the ARM based windows they are still working on, and Windows running on the XBox One, etc..
So it's been 40 years. He hasn't been caught. How many times has this been tried since then? There have been hijackings since then, which has led to increased security. I don't think finding DB Cooper is going to dissuade anyone from going after a plane if they are crazy or dumb enough to try.
So the rate of brain cancer going down tells us that either there's no correlation OR that the decrease in power, coupled with increased use of hands-free devices, headphones, and speakerphone modes has roughly balanced out the increase in usage.
Excellent point. Another confounding factor is, as far as cancers go, brain cancer is pretty rare. I think it's something like 6 or 7 per 100,000, as opposed to 120 in 100,000 for breast and prostate cancers. So small increases or decreases in the rate are nearly indistinguishable from "noise," statistically speaking.
The main take-away is, even if you assume all brain cancer is cell phone related, if you are concerned with a 0.006% chance of getting cancer from a cell phone, you probably don't want to step foot in a car or go anywhere near a swimming pool, as you are much, *MUCH* more likely to die from those two things than a cell phone.
You only need one statistic.
Cell phone usage has increased by over an order of magnitude between 1992 and 2014 in the US.
The rate of brain cancer diagnoses has slightly decreased in the same time span.
Some studies take 'liberties' with the statistics and say that there is an increase, but they are usually separating out categories of cancers, which get shuffled around from time to time, to say that one category has increased without mentioning that another has decreased or has been eliminated entirely.
CO2 emissions from rotting plant matter are minimal. Most of the carbon is gobbled up by the bacteria, mold and bugs that are eating the dead plants. A tree will take in far more CO2 during it's lifespan than it will emit after dying.
I think that, maybe, the OP wants to stream a playlist *once* then stop. My kids would watch their favorite shows over and over again. So the playlist needs a tiny bit of intelligence.
Only way I can think to do this, without hacking up a custom Plex plugin, would be setting up a time limit. Maybe a tinydlna server brought up by a cron job, then another job that kills it after two hours or so?
GM built it's own battery factory. Practically nobody knows about it. They make all of their own battery packs for their hybrid and pure EV vehicles. It came on-line on time and roughly at capacity.
GM hasn't run a large-scale battery operation like this but it managed to figure it out. Building the factory in an area already saturated with large factory operations probably helped out a bit. Building a factory in the middle of the desert, where the nearest, largest factory builds slot machines, probably is a hindrance.
Even if you are house owner you can easily understand what this means : imagine your house which had a monthly cost of 600$-700$ (inflation adjusted cost) now has a monthly average cost of 4000$.
The cost would only go up if you were renting. There are usually caps on property tax increases to avoid things like that happening to homeowners. Even if property taxes shot up, you could rent out your house for a bunch of money to make up for it. You'd have to move, but if rents are that high you could probably pay off the mortgage pretty quickly that way.
If you owned your house you could sell it for a tidy profit, or keep it as you saw fit. If you don't own your own house, you can't really complain about rent increasing as it's not your house.