There's nothing odd about it. They posted as AC, and AC comments are automatically -1 when thy are posted. And since many people browse above -1 to avoid trolls and spam it will take longer for people with mod points to see the message and rate it up.
My point to the AC was that Uber is a single company for all its markets -- It's not possible for an investor to only put their capital in one areas of Uber where they are making profits -- so it doesn't matter how the health of a single area is. They're investing in the whole enchilada so it's the profitability of the whole company that counts..
Using profitability in one market to distract the ship taking on water is an excuse for C-levels trying to calm investors. And are those profits growing in markets where everything is locked up and stable legally/politically? Or are these areas where Uber is just sneaking under the radar still?
Uber has a ton of infrastructure investment - it's mostly been clearing the way for the company to exist, legally speaking. They've already shown they can grow profits regularly where they are allowed to operate, so that is a way bigger deal than people are allowing for.
Not quite sure how they can be "growing profits" if the company is not yet operating in the black to start with.
User's infrastructure was MUCH HARDER to build out than Amazon's, which is just code and servers... Uber had to deal with real people - and not just people, but government officials.
"Amazon is just code and servers" -- I'll remember that next time the I hear about their sprawling warehouses around the world. And I guess they were able to begin operations in all those places without talking to a single government official, right? Not to mention the ~150,000 people they employ -- directly with W-2's, not as "contractors" as Uber likes to use to skirt many employment regulations. And that drone thing? Nah, FAA just preemptively mailed them their blessing for testing -- no interaction on Amazon's part needed there.
Yes but by having crapware in the online version they are forcing you to act to disagree with their offer and find another way, ie use the offline installer, you should only have to act to agree to it
Major advertisers starting following the DNT standard. Then browser vendors broke the protocol, in such a way that it became useless.
We need ALL advertisers to be beholden to follow a DNT standard, not just a few key players. Otherwise you'll just end up with all the other advertisers suddenly getting bigger when companies flock to the ad agencies that have better access to consumers since they are not honoring DNT. This will likely be followed by the ones that did agree to honor DNT ducking out of the agreement, because there are so many companies not following the rules so the initiative is worthless they'll say. The whole thing will just collapse on itself.
Don't need to tell me. I already use AdBlock Plus and Ghostery. I just see no reason to start any sort of "do not track initiative" when there are going to be slimy companies that ignore it anyway and even if there were legal requirements they follow it, they would just relocate outside the jurisdiction.
Let's remember that an operating system and computer applications are two different things.
Microsoft is no longer including a 100% free-in-cost Solitaire game with Windows, you're now asked to spend some of your attention watching ads to play.
That's not a change to Windows the operating system -- that's a change to some freebie game that was originally included with Windows. Call me back when Microsoft starts making me look at ads to mount a flash drive (with no way to disable them unless I pay).
Yeah, cause there are no other solitaire games for Windows you can play instead that are free. The rules for the game are owned by Microsoft, after all. Talk about a case of wanting to throw out the baby with the bath water.
How about adding a button on the device? To modify anything, you need to hold the button. And it's a momentary push button, not a switch, so the user can't leave it enabled.
That sounds too much like WPS. And we know how that came out.
"The Honeywell Tuxedo Touch Controller web interface uses JavaScript to check for client authentication and redirect unauthorized users to a login page."
You'd think that a company like Honeywell would know better about security, especially as they have a whole cyber security division...
I'm sure they don't see any reason to expend such resources on the consumer space. That expertise is reserved for getting government contracts.
The courts regularly rely on the official annotations to rule on cases, thereby making them a part of the law.
While everyone is focusing on the copyright angle, I find that interesting. If the court is unable to understand the laws without Cliff's Notes, there's something wrong with the laws themselves.
Chrome DOES have "mute tab" button right on the tab - I use it everyday... Look at http://www.omgchrome.com/how-t... or just look up "enable chrome tab mute" to learn...er...what you should have researched before you wrote TFS.
You know, the summary is only four sentences long. Is your attention span too short to read the whole thing -- where in the next sentence it's mentioned it has to be enabled using the same trick you linked to?
Haven't we been reading about this for a few years now? LEO's not following the law when it comes to wiretaps and obtaining information from companies about customers they believe are connected to crimes they are investigating.
There's one thing missing in all these stories -- people at those agencies being held responsible for their actions.
Slashdot Mirror
Funny that you're at -1 for being right.
There's nothing odd about it. They posted as AC, and AC comments are automatically -1 when thy are posted. And since many people browse above -1 to avoid trolls and spam it will take longer for people with mod points to see the message and rate it up.
I was referring investing, and the fact Uber is a single company, not a collection of smaller market-specific Ubers.
My point to the AC was that Uber is a single company for all its markets -- It's not possible for an investor to only put their capital in one areas of Uber where they are making profits -- so it doesn't matter how the health of a single area is. They're investing in the whole enchilada so it's the profitability of the whole company that counts..
In case anyone can't see that employment chart, here is a screenshot of it.
There's only one Uber.
Using profitability in one market to distract the ship taking on water is an excuse for C-levels trying to calm investors. And are those profits growing in markets where everything is locked up and stable legally/politically? Or are these areas where Uber is just sneaking under the radar still?
Who rated this tripe Insightful?
Uber has a ton of infrastructure investment - it's mostly been clearing the way for the company to exist, legally speaking. They've already shown they can grow profits regularly where they are allowed to operate, so that is a way bigger deal than people are allowing for.
Not quite sure how they can be "growing profits" if the company is not yet operating in the black to start with.
User's infrastructure was MUCH HARDER to build out than Amazon's, which is just code and servers... Uber had to deal with real people - and not just people, but government officials.
"Amazon is just code and servers" -- I'll remember that next time the I hear about their sprawling warehouses around the world. And I guess they were able to begin operations in all those places without talking to a single government official, right? Not to mention the ~150,000 people they employ -- directly with W-2's, not as "contractors" as Uber likes to use to skirt many employment regulations. And that drone thing? Nah, FAA just preemptively mailed them their blessing for testing -- no interaction on Amazon's part needed there.
I don't mean old ones, I mean I was expecting that this would be a story about the bogs becoming a popular dumping place for murderers.
Yes but by having crapware in the online version they are forcing you to act to disagree with their offer and find another way, ie use the offline installer, you should only have to act to agree to it
You can turn those offers off.
Major advertisers starting following the DNT standard.
Then browser vendors broke the protocol, in such a way that it became useless.
We need ALL advertisers to be beholden to follow a DNT standard, not just a few key players.
Otherwise you'll just end up with all the other advertisers suddenly getting bigger when companies flock to the ad agencies that have better access to consumers since they are not honoring DNT. This will likely be followed by the ones that did agree to honor DNT ducking out of the agreement, because there are so many companies not following the rules so the initiative is worthless they'll say. The whole thing will just collapse on itself.
Don't need to tell me. I already use AdBlock Plus and Ghostery.
I just see no reason to start any sort of "do not track initiative" when there are going to be slimy companies that ignore it anyway and even if there were legal requirements they follow it, they would just relocate outside the jurisdiction.
Without the cooperation of the advertising industry this will be as successful as the last "Do Not Track" initiative.
Let's remember that an operating system and computer applications are two different things.
Microsoft is no longer including a 100% free-in-cost Solitaire game with Windows, you're now asked to spend some of your attention watching ads to play.
That's not a change to Windows the operating system -- that's a change to some freebie game that was originally included with Windows. Call me back when Microsoft starts making me look at ads to mount a flash drive (with no way to disable them unless I pay).
Yeah, cause there are no other solitaire games for Windows you can play instead that are free. The rules for the game are owned by Microsoft, after all.
Talk about a case of wanting to throw out the baby with the bath water.
I was expecting some sort of Marvel tie-in myself.
Hey, we have the ASUS Transformer devices.
Must be great white sharks, though.
How about adding a button on the device? To modify anything, you need to hold the button. And it's a momentary push button, not a switch, so the user can't leave it enabled.
That sounds too much like WPS. And we know how that came out.
"The Honeywell Tuxedo Touch Controller web interface uses JavaScript to check for client authentication and redirect unauthorized users to a login page."
You'd think that a company like Honeywell would know better about security, especially as they have a whole cyber security division...
I'm sure they don't see any reason to expend such resources on the consumer space.
That expertise is reserved for getting government contracts.
The courts regularly rely on the official annotations to rule on cases, thereby making them a part of the law.
While everyone is focusing on the copyright angle, I find that interesting.
If the court is unable to understand the laws without Cliff's Notes, there's something wrong with the laws themselves.
Of course, you would use properly licensed modeling files, right? ;)
I mean, you wouldn't download a car, would you?
Chrome DOES have "mute tab" button right on the tab - I use it everyday ... Look at http://www.omgchrome.com/how-t... or just look up "enable chrome tab mute" to learn...er...what you should have researched before you wrote TFS.
You know, the summary is only four sentences long. Is your attention span too short to read the whole thing -- where in the next sentence it's mentioned it has to be enabled using the same trick you linked to?
Wait 'till they get a hold of the 23andMe data from yesterday.
Maybe they're just young people who are overworked (because they'll put up with it), and therefore appear to be over 30 to you?
Haven't we been reading about this for a few years now? LEO's not following the law when it comes to wiretaps and obtaining information from companies about customers they believe are connected to crimes they are investigating.
There's one thing missing in all these stories -- people at those agencies being held responsible for their actions.
You can't spell crook without "rook".
What does Wayland solve for me, a standard Ubuntu user? What I have wordks ok, why does it need to change?
I hear LibreOffice has a spell checker.