This data MIGHT be accurate, it might even represent much more than just tech workers. But, the source of this data is a voluntary survey conducted within an app whose sole purpose is to allow you to chat with coworkers behind your employers back and anonymously review the place you work. Usage is probably skewed a bit toward those that aren't happy with their workplace. Personally, I'm more surprised that 43% of respondents from an app like that didn't claim to be burned out.
Your front door isn't truly secure, it can be knocked down. Does that mean you shouldn't lock it? Does that mean the President shouldn't lock his doors?
Personally, I feel like even if a problem can't be entirely avoided, it makes sense to put a reasonable amount of effort into reducing the chances of that problem occurring. Seems like most folks agree considering how often people lock their doors. I suspect you agree, too, but decided to throw logic out the window on this one for whatever reason. The fact that one of these domains was better protected tells us more could've been done to protect the others, and I don't think it's unreasonable to ask an administration that has stressed the importance of email security as much as this one has to put that little bit of effort in.
Look at the further reading. Just a random collection of negative stories because that's what the editor looked for. The Apple stories here are a joke, they're only meant to stir up feuds about something nobody should give a damn about: what devices other people use.
Phones with replaceable batteries are still on sale today, but most people don't realize it because they are usually a bit bigger and therefore are very unpopular. This is a thing everyone seems to ignore every time we talk about phones with batteries that can't easily be replaced: You have a choice already, you made it, claiming you were ignorant of your options does not justify a law to take away the option most people prefer. And yes, most people do prefer phones with batteries that can't be replaced because they don't like the bulky replaceable batteries.
Slashdot is always full of people saying we should vote with our wallets. We did, replaceable batteries lost.
I can't claim to be an expert, but I'd say try to roll back to before the updates if you can. If that doesn't work I would probably re-install Windows. If it's trying to boot but just keeps restarting it shouldn't be bricked, so a re-install should get it booting again in any case. Just be careful not to automatically update again after the re-install!
Not quite the reasoning. Your insurance rate starts dropping at 25 as long as you maintain a good driving record. If you just start driving at 50, your rate will start at about the same point as if you were 25. The reason the "sweet spot" appears to be 50-60 is that most folks have a steadily decreasing rate starting at 25 or so, and then it starts going up again at 65 when most folks' reaction times and eyesight start to suffer significantly. I've also read that, statistically, the lowest number of crashes per miles driven tends to occur around age 70, but I never see anyone argue that 70 year old people are the best or safest drivers. Something tells me it's not as simple as saying any group of people is better at driving than any other group.
You can't hire an electrician from London that isn't licensed to work here to wire your house and still get it approved. Just like Apple couldn't have hired some dick off the street to design their building and still get it signed off on. The whole reason these people get licensed is to demonstrate that you can trust them with this stuff. Is your entire argument based on the assumption that Apple hired unlicensed idiots to design their building? Or were you completely unaware of how any of that works? Because that's a pretty thin argument.
Is the pig fucking question supposed to be edgy? Grow up, kiddo.
Are you suggesting that when you hire experts to do something and they mess up it's your fault? So, if you hire an electrician to rewire your house and your house burns down because he did a poor job, you wouldn't go after the electrician, right? You'd say it was all your fault for hiring a bad electrician and take responsibility for burning your house down? So contractors can do whatever they want, and inspectors can approve whatever they want, and then it's all the building owners fault for not becoming an expert themselves and correcting the work of the contractor?
So to be honest, the list I've narrowed it down to is largely based on personal recommendations from the IT staff at companies we deal with. We're small to the point where we don't have any dedicated IT staff so those things just fall on my shoulders because I'm reasonably good with computers. So on password managers, the biggest things I need are ease of use for the employees who are mostly not very comfortable with computers, and easy administration which should include password distribution either to groups or individual users and I'd like the ability to mass-reset passwords as folks leave the company, and if I can find something that we run on our own server instead of on that company's servers it would be preferred. We don't actually need any mobile app access, and all our PCs run Windows so that's the only thing it needs to work on. Endorsement from experts is always a plus but it's not a dealbreaker as long as nobody has outright said they are bad. Open source would be a perk in my mind because of pricing and availability, but also I'd want to make sure it's a project that has been around a while and looks like it will stay around for a while. I'm really just winging it, which is what most of my IT work is, so we'll see where I land. Keepass is actually on my list as someone recommended it to me but I haven't looked into it too deeply yet. This whole project of finding a password manager is actually sort of my own deal so I can only work on it in my free time, which barely exists. But I really need to get us past word documents with passwords in them, it's physically painful for me to see that all the time.
I'm actually in charge of finding a new password manager for the small business I work at and Keeper was one of the few I'd narrowed my choices down to. They just knocked themselves off that list. My company is small and that's no huge loss for them, but I know I'm not the only person making that choice. Now, had they responded to this stating they're temporarily disabling the browser extension while they work on a fix, they'd still be on the list. When are companies going to learn that trying to shut down bad publicity is the worst publicity of all?
Ahh I think I get it now. So yeah, still a dick move, but not a NN issue. I guess they'll always find a way to screw us in the end. Thanks for explaining it, very much appreciated.
Thanks! But I'm still a little unclear on why it isn't considered blocking since credentials can be entered manually. I mean, when I brought my PS4 to my friend's house where Verizon provided his internet service and he wasn't an HBO subscriber, I was able to use my HBO Go just fine. Logins can be entered manually when the ISP doesn't forward it themselves, after all it is HBO "Go" and isn't meant to only be used at home through your own ISP, so I understand that when Comcast just isn't forwarding the login info it wouldn't be a NN violation, but not sending the info I manually enter still seems like it would be.
What? Comcast was blocking a service their customers were paying for until that service payed Comcast more money. Can you explain why NN does not encompass that? I'm not saying it definitely does, but your response does nothing but shit on someone without explaining your position, so it's impossible to take you seriously right now.
For a while, Comcast was blocking access to HBO Go on Playstations. They were very clear on that being a business decision. So I paid Comcast, I paid HBO, and I paid Sony, but I wasn't able to use the services I was paying for the way they were intended. A quote from Comcast on the matter:
All - Thanks for your patience while this deal was worked.
As mentioned earlier, we want to bring our content to as many platforms as we can, but these are business deals that need to be negotiated and sometimes it can take time to come to agreeable terms.
In other words, they won't offer the service until someone other than their customer pays them to offer it. This kept going even when we had net neutrality regulations. This jackass thinks it won't happen after getting rid of those regulations? What the hell is wrong with the world lately?
You get to ask an expert witness why their opinion is what it is, and if they answer "I'm not telling," their credibility is shot and there's a good chance their testimony will be thrown out. This software is an expert witness that nobody has any reason to believe giving testimony damning a person and then refusing to explain why but maintaining credibility. Analyzing whatever algorithm the software uses would be like questioning the witness, which is your right as a defendant in the USA, and keeping it hidden is literally denying you that right.
Wish I had mod points. I work at a manufacturing company, our cost of materials is on average around 15%. We would sell iPhones for almost $2,500, and that would be the cost to Apple. Folks are kidding themselves if they think Apple ever even sees this price, they don't even manufacture it themselves, it's all outsourced and you can bet your ass Apple knows how much the components cost and would never expect to pay close to that little for their hardware. Then there's their cost to develop the OS, which is where all the value actually lies in the iPhone, and it's starting to look like a thousand bucks for the phone isn't that bad a deal.
Why are we linking to shitty sources that lie, and including their lies in the summary? That Bustle article that's quoted has a clear grudge, they try to paint Amazon as big evil even after explaining the practice is commonplace among grocers. The stltoday article is a straight-up reprint of the original WaPo article that just doesn't link back to the original or the original sources. Bustle links back to the same WaPo article no less than five times, suggesting it's really just a repackaging of the same article, and it is, they just write it with more of an obvious grudge against Amazon. Hey David, maybe take the "editor" bit out of your name, you don't edit anything you fool. You can't even filter out bullshit repackaged month-old stories.
In the last six years, a lot of parents have upgraded their tablets. My sister in law is one of them. She "gave" her old tablet to her son, he's only allowed to use it a few hours a week but for the purpose of this he'd be considered to have his own tablet. So this survey doesn't actually mean a lot.
That said, letting electronics raise your child is a common practice and not a good thing. It's not new, the tablets are new but personally I grew up watching excessive television and that's really no better. It may even be worse as there's no real interaction with the television. The point is, this survey makes it sound like tablets are causing some new wave of neglectful parenting, but that's not the case at all they're just the new go-to distraction taking the place of the last one. I'm sure before television, there were other things parents would let children do that weren't good for them but got them out of the parents' hair. My thinking is, exposure to any of these things (tablets included) isn't inherently bad, and kids having their own isn't even bad, but anything in the absence of good parenting becomes a bad thing.
Oh, and law enforcement does not have "backdoor access", at least not the way that I would interpret the phrase.
But then there's this. So how, exactly, do you interpret the phrase? I know that's old news, but if they developed something new it's not as if they would tell us.
Your personal standards being low enough to not mind this doesn't make it any less of a bad thing. Some people care more about these things than you do and they pay a premium for quality. When you sign up for an unlimited plan, you expect it to be unlimited so you can enjoy these higher quality streams, especially when the provider explicitly stated they wouldn't be throttling when you signed up for it. It's a basic bait and switch, customers were sold one thing and now they're being given another, there's no reason you should be making excuses for Verizon.
Slashdot Mirror
This data MIGHT be accurate, it might even represent much more than just tech workers. But, the source of this data is a voluntary survey conducted within an app whose sole purpose is to allow you to chat with coworkers behind your employers back and anonymously review the place you work. Usage is probably skewed a bit toward those that aren't happy with their workplace. Personally, I'm more surprised that 43% of respondents from an app like that didn't claim to be burned out.
I know, I got excited, too.
False equivalencies destroy credibility for either side. You're not doing your party any favors.
Your front door isn't truly secure, it can be knocked down. Does that mean you shouldn't lock it? Does that mean the President shouldn't lock his doors?
Personally, I feel like even if a problem can't be entirely avoided, it makes sense to put a reasonable amount of effort into reducing the chances of that problem occurring. Seems like most folks agree considering how often people lock their doors. I suspect you agree, too, but decided to throw logic out the window on this one for whatever reason. The fact that one of these domains was better protected tells us more could've been done to protect the others, and I don't think it's unreasonable to ask an administration that has stressed the importance of email security as much as this one has to put that little bit of effort in.
Look at the further reading. Just a random collection of negative stories because that's what the editor looked for. The Apple stories here are a joke, they're only meant to stir up feuds about something nobody should give a damn about: what devices other people use.
You have been a comment hero lately, good sir. Thanks for your contributions! You'd get all my mod points if I had any.
Phones with replaceable batteries are still on sale today, but most people don't realize it because they are usually a bit bigger and therefore are very unpopular. This is a thing everyone seems to ignore every time we talk about phones with batteries that can't easily be replaced: You have a choice already, you made it, claiming you were ignorant of your options does not justify a law to take away the option most people prefer. And yes, most people do prefer phones with batteries that can't be replaced because they don't like the bulky replaceable batteries.
Slashdot is always full of people saying we should vote with our wallets. We did, replaceable batteries lost.
I can't claim to be an expert, but I'd say try to roll back to before the updates if you can. If that doesn't work I would probably re-install Windows. If it's trying to boot but just keeps restarting it shouldn't be bricked, so a re-install should get it booting again in any case. Just be careful not to automatically update again after the re-install!
You won't even notice the effects of the patch.
Not quite the reasoning. Your insurance rate starts dropping at 25 as long as you maintain a good driving record. If you just start driving at 50, your rate will start at about the same point as if you were 25. The reason the "sweet spot" appears to be 50-60 is that most folks have a steadily decreasing rate starting at 25 or so, and then it starts going up again at 65 when most folks' reaction times and eyesight start to suffer significantly. I've also read that, statistically, the lowest number of crashes per miles driven tends to occur around age 70, but I never see anyone argue that 70 year old people are the best or safest drivers. Something tells me it's not as simple as saying any group of people is better at driving than any other group.
You can't hire an electrician from London that isn't licensed to work here to wire your house and still get it approved. Just like Apple couldn't have hired some dick off the street to design their building and still get it signed off on. The whole reason these people get licensed is to demonstrate that you can trust them with this stuff. Is your entire argument based on the assumption that Apple hired unlicensed idiots to design their building? Or were you completely unaware of how any of that works? Because that's a pretty thin argument.
Is the pig fucking question supposed to be edgy? Grow up, kiddo.
Are you suggesting that when you hire experts to do something and they mess up it's your fault? So, if you hire an electrician to rewire your house and your house burns down because he did a poor job, you wouldn't go after the electrician, right? You'd say it was all your fault for hiring a bad electrician and take responsibility for burning your house down? So contractors can do whatever they want, and inspectors can approve whatever they want, and then it's all the building owners fault for not becoming an expert themselves and correcting the work of the contractor?
I mean, that's an argument, I guess.
So to be honest, the list I've narrowed it down to is largely based on personal recommendations from the IT staff at companies we deal with. We're small to the point where we don't have any dedicated IT staff so those things just fall on my shoulders because I'm reasonably good with computers. So on password managers, the biggest things I need are ease of use for the employees who are mostly not very comfortable with computers, and easy administration which should include password distribution either to groups or individual users and I'd like the ability to mass-reset passwords as folks leave the company, and if I can find something that we run on our own server instead of on that company's servers it would be preferred. We don't actually need any mobile app access, and all our PCs run Windows so that's the only thing it needs to work on. Endorsement from experts is always a plus but it's not a dealbreaker as long as nobody has outright said they are bad. Open source would be a perk in my mind because of pricing and availability, but also I'd want to make sure it's a project that has been around a while and looks like it will stay around for a while. I'm really just winging it, which is what most of my IT work is, so we'll see where I land. Keepass is actually on my list as someone recommended it to me but I haven't looked into it too deeply yet. This whole project of finding a password manager is actually sort of my own deal so I can only work on it in my free time, which barely exists. But I really need to get us past word documents with passwords in them, it's physically painful for me to see that all the time.
I'm actually in charge of finding a new password manager for the small business I work at and Keeper was one of the few I'd narrowed my choices down to. They just knocked themselves off that list. My company is small and that's no huge loss for them, but I know I'm not the only person making that choice. Now, had they responded to this stating they're temporarily disabling the browser extension while they work on a fix, they'd still be on the list. When are companies going to learn that trying to shut down bad publicity is the worst publicity of all?
Ahh I think I get it now. So yeah, still a dick move, but not a NN issue. I guess they'll always find a way to screw us in the end. Thanks for explaining it, very much appreciated.
Thanks! But I'm still a little unclear on why it isn't considered blocking since credentials can be entered manually. I mean, when I brought my PS4 to my friend's house where Verizon provided his internet service and he wasn't an HBO subscriber, I was able to use my HBO Go just fine. Logins can be entered manually when the ISP doesn't forward it themselves, after all it is HBO "Go" and isn't meant to only be used at home through your own ISP, so I understand that when Comcast just isn't forwarding the login info it wouldn't be a NN violation, but not sending the info I manually enter still seems like it would be.
What? Comcast was blocking a service their customers were paying for until that service payed Comcast more money. Can you explain why NN does not encompass that? I'm not saying it definitely does, but your response does nothing but shit on someone without explaining your position, so it's impossible to take you seriously right now.
I know it was a small thing, but it was a thing that frustrated me for quite some time:
http://forums.xfinity.com/t5/Stream-TV-App/HBO-Go-on-PlayStation-3-amp-PlayStation-4/td-p/2838840
For a while, Comcast was blocking access to HBO Go on Playstations. They were very clear on that being a business decision. So I paid Comcast, I paid HBO, and I paid Sony, but I wasn't able to use the services I was paying for the way they were intended. A quote from Comcast on the matter:
All - Thanks for your patience while this deal was worked.
As mentioned earlier, we want to bring our content to as many platforms as we can, but these are business deals that need to be negotiated and sometimes it can take time to come to agreeable terms.
In other words, they won't offer the service until someone other than their customer pays them to offer it. This kept going even when we had net neutrality regulations. This jackass thinks it won't happen after getting rid of those regulations? What the hell is wrong with the world lately?
You get to ask an expert witness why their opinion is what it is, and if they answer "I'm not telling," their credibility is shot and there's a good chance their testimony will be thrown out. This software is an expert witness that nobody has any reason to believe giving testimony damning a person and then refusing to explain why but maintaining credibility. Analyzing whatever algorithm the software uses would be like questioning the witness, which is your right as a defendant in the USA, and keeping it hidden is literally denying you that right.
Wish I had mod points. I work at a manufacturing company, our cost of materials is on average around 15%. We would sell iPhones for almost $2,500, and that would be the cost to Apple. Folks are kidding themselves if they think Apple ever even sees this price, they don't even manufacture it themselves, it's all outsourced and you can bet your ass Apple knows how much the components cost and would never expect to pay close to that little for their hardware. Then there's their cost to develop the OS, which is where all the value actually lies in the iPhone, and it's starting to look like a thousand bucks for the phone isn't that bad a deal.
reported for the Post, which is owned by Amazon.
Why are we linking to shitty sources that lie, and including their lies in the summary? That Bustle article that's quoted has a clear grudge, they try to paint Amazon as big evil even after explaining the practice is commonplace among grocers. The stltoday article is a straight-up reprint of the original WaPo article that just doesn't link back to the original or the original sources. Bustle links back to the same WaPo article no less than five times, suggesting it's really just a repackaging of the same article, and it is, they just write it with more of an obvious grudge against Amazon. Hey David, maybe take the "editor" bit out of your name, you don't edit anything you fool. You can't even filter out bullshit repackaged month-old stories.
In the last six years, a lot of parents have upgraded their tablets. My sister in law is one of them. She "gave" her old tablet to her son, he's only allowed to use it a few hours a week but for the purpose of this he'd be considered to have his own tablet. So this survey doesn't actually mean a lot.
That said, letting electronics raise your child is a common practice and not a good thing. It's not new, the tablets are new but personally I grew up watching excessive television and that's really no better. It may even be worse as there's no real interaction with the television. The point is, this survey makes it sound like tablets are causing some new wave of neglectful parenting, but that's not the case at all they're just the new go-to distraction taking the place of the last one. I'm sure before television, there were other things parents would let children do that weren't good for them but got them out of the parents' hair. My thinking is, exposure to any of these things (tablets included) isn't inherently bad, and kids having their own isn't even bad, but anything in the absence of good parenting becomes a bad thing.
Oh, and law enforcement does not have "backdoor access", at least not the way that I would interpret the phrase.
But then there's this. So how, exactly, do you interpret the phrase? I know that's old news, but if they developed something new it's not as if they would tell us.
They did introduce a new character named Alexa... It's the Dots! You don't think they're done, do you? I'm looking forward to a season full of this.
Is it good enough? Yes.
Your personal standards being low enough to not mind this doesn't make it any less of a bad thing. Some people care more about these things than you do and they pay a premium for quality. When you sign up for an unlimited plan, you expect it to be unlimited so you can enjoy these higher quality streams, especially when the provider explicitly stated they wouldn't be throttling when you signed up for it. It's a basic bait and switch, customers were sold one thing and now they're being given another, there's no reason you should be making excuses for Verizon.