Statistically, cops have far fewer accidents that they caused. Should they be cited? Sure. Will they? Never, as the fraternity of enforcers exempts themselves, and given human behavior, you're not going to easily change that, even with cop-cams. I understand your fears, I doubt that you'll be able to change the behavior of public safety officers. Good luck.
It's disingenuous to assert that Google doesn't know about the data that is collects, sells it (the http_referrer coin collection), and that the advertiser whose link you clicked doesn't know you, perhaps by name (referring to the fact that the IPv4 address space has largely known destinations to the street address and user-characteristics).
Upsetting is that claims of unidentifiable use are in fact, one of the most hilarious lies in computing, as all of this information in a click-thru is so handily re-assembled. There is no privacy here, in the very tiniest. Google's business model is to know--==> you. They don't have this right.
Slashdot knows who I am. My IP is known. They can be linked. One can become somewhat anonymous on the Internet, but only by trying really, really hard to accomplish this, and it's transient at best-- as accumulated information becomes your dossier.
The implications of dossiers are for a different forum, but in this circumstance, this thread, this post, it's my criticism of the pretension within the post, viz: "And with your permission and all of that, you are interacting with the things going on in the room" means that your devices will be forced to respond to its ambient environment, and what you do, even say, maybe your sexual responses, all of these will become exposed, modesty and your intentions to hide these things, vanquished by environmental probes.
Erratic isn't a useful measure. Voluntarily removing your focus from driving, e.g. taking a call, removing your eyes from the road for more than a second every 20sec, there'll be something that could be a viable measure that puts people's eyes back on the road, and not the latest tweet or instagram pic.
I can stop your heart with 2microvolts if it's attached to a 9mm slug.
To keep the oscillator going, a nanoamp is one measure, but voltage pushes that current through the coil to make it move. Voltage, difference in potential, is unlikely to come from ambient sources, so the there's still a little bit of a kick left in the battery, not the surrounding area.
I drive about 150mi per week on highways, not freeways, and watch as dozens and dozens of people text. They're easy to spot.
Were we to apply the emphasis towards keeping your eyes on the road, rather than improving brakes-- which were probably ok as they DON'T DO FORENSICS on such accidents, better money would be spent.
How do you get people to stop fooling with their devices? Enable motion detection, which keeps the cam on in the phone. Might not work for many, but I'd like to see texting and driving fined in the same way as DUIs. Same problem: irresponsibility.
And each click gets them an IP address, and a history and an object. Who do you think you're kidding? Click-thrus are insanely read by each of the advertisers, and in turn, as no agreement exists at this phase, does WHAT THEY WANT with the data.
Advertisers see 100% of the clicks. 100%. Not nothing, 100%. Why? C'mon. You think we're stupid??
There are well-known methods of avoiding browser fingerprinting, and supercookies are easily eliminated.
Hints: use multiple browsers; rename innocuous cookies to the filename of well-known supercookies, then use whatever is appropriate for your operating system to make the cookie R/O. Some of us don't use gmail (or google) at all, and many more use a separate browser for social media, sometimes several of them. It's also fun to go to the library and copy salient cookie files from their browsers (easily done) and then copy them into your favorite browser's storage to salt things up. YMMV.
Which is why it's a great idea to kill your cookies frequently. A few years from now, I'll find a thrift store with wearables, don some random ones, and freakout some database analysts.
Wow-- Ernie-- look at this! J Lo, Rod Canion, and Merle Haggard Jr are passing thru this train station! Look!
I vaguely remember that during the nomination of Judge Bork to the SCOTUS, his video rental habits revelation spawned a law that forbids such things, but the details are eluding me.
But that's the US, and not the rest of the world, and is likely to be done eventually. The data is voluminous, the motives evil.
Happens right now. Google gets your permission to vacuum the contents of Gmail, liberate data from your Android phone, and then somehow, removing "personal identifiable information", liberates this data and sells it to others, who reassemble the information.
Permission, I believe within this context, is another of Schmidt's reality distortions. The Internet of Crap will indeed require interactions, and they'll be two states for you to interact: by the facade of your permission, and by devices querying your to obtain metadata to interact with you and then send the results to some hadoop cluster in SeaLandia for, um, additional processing.
When you look at atmospheric maps, the amount of space debris is truly horrendous. No space garbagemen are going up there, tidying things up, then coming back to earth with a load of space trash-- unless we have details the military aren't confessing to.
If you're trying to put satellites into LEOs, you must also contend with all of the other junk already there, most working but some not. Yes, they decay. Could take weeks, could take centuries. I say: pay the freaking money and just wire fibre, multimode, pay the damn bill, and get over it. Fiber done well has the ability to go far beyond gigabit to the bedroom. Use low power/low radius tranceivers, like we do with cellular and WiFi technologies (among others) to give that all important Facebook search at the beach.
Nice work, but serious hubris and marketing going on here. Google can't seem to find a product these days, and this is just another attempt to get in on the non-robotic servant market. I wish they'd read the scifi books inspiring their products to the freaking end of the book.
As an industry, a gaggle of monopolies, and true, oligopoly. Said differently: a couple of them have at least the facade of trying to be reasonable, and while admittedly planes stay in the air and land safely these days, that should have been a pre-requisite.
More than two million flight miles later, I won't fly on half the carriers in the USA, and British Airways is added to the list for multiple sins of mismanagement.
And my point is that the chain of authorities is broken, and needs to be fixed, and anyone not doing MD5s are at risk. I would do these anyway. Lots of others don't.
It's nice to try to deflate this, but the blunder and the QA mistake remain. As I like to hesitate on the side of caution, I'd change this quickly. Just agreeing that one screwed up and not halting distribution for this head-desk sort of error -- in the face of the enormous security risk endowed -- isn't quite satisfactory.
I'm here to punish no one, but in a crazy sort of way, I find this one to be a bit mind-boggling, to the tune that each and every appliance that wasn't independently MD5'd is now a freaking five star security risk. Chain of authorities are tremendously important, and reasonable people would believe, mistakenly, that all is fine, when none of it now is, because the chain of authorities chain has been broken, and for what I know, from its inception.
So you're telling me to cool down, and I'm telling you that every single Docker implementation is now reasonably suspect, because of this go-lightly screw-up.
How many years have we been talking about this. The FTC launches *a few* lawsuits, NOT THE FBI, who handles criminal litigation. Did you even read the summary? WTF.
Slashdot Mirror
Insurance companies, nationwide. In terms of accident-free miles, only truck drivers are better.
Statistically, cops have far fewer accidents that they caused. Should they be cited? Sure. Will they? Never, as the fraternity of enforcers exempts themselves, and given human behavior, you're not going to easily change that, even with cop-cams. I understand your fears, I doubt that you'll be able to change the behavior of public safety officers. Good luck.
It's disingenuous to assert that Google doesn't know about the data that is collects, sells it (the http_referrer coin collection), and that the advertiser whose link you clicked doesn't know you, perhaps by name (referring to the fact that the IPv4 address space has largely known destinations to the street address and user-characteristics).
Upsetting is that claims of unidentifiable use are in fact, one of the most hilarious lies in computing, as all of this information in a click-thru is so handily re-assembled. There is no privacy here, in the very tiniest. Google's business model is to know--==> you. They don't have this right.
Slashdot knows who I am. My IP is known. They can be linked. One can become somewhat anonymous on the Internet, but only by trying really, really hard to accomplish this, and it's transient at best-- as accumulated information becomes your dossier.
The implications of dossiers are for a different forum, but in this circumstance, this thread, this post, it's my criticism of the pretension within the post, viz: "And with your permission and all of that, you are interacting with the things going on in the room" means that your devices will be forced to respond to its ambient environment, and what you do, even say, maybe your sexual responses, all of these will become exposed, modesty and your intentions to hide these things, vanquished by environmental probes.
Erratic isn't a useful measure. Voluntarily removing your focus from driving, e.g. taking a call, removing your eyes from the road for more than a second every 20sec, there'll be something that could be a viable measure that puts people's eyes back on the road, and not the latest tweet or instagram pic.
I can stop your heart with 2microvolts if it's attached to a 9mm slug.
To keep the oscillator going, a nanoamp is one measure, but voltage pushes that current through the coil to make it move. Voltage, difference in potential, is unlikely to come from ambient sources, so the there's still a little bit of a kick left in the battery, not the surrounding area.
I drive about 150mi per week on highways, not freeways, and watch as dozens and dozens of people text. They're easy to spot.
Were we to apply the emphasis towards keeping your eyes on the road, rather than improving brakes-- which were probably ok as they DON'T DO FORENSICS on such accidents, better money would be spent.
How do you get people to stop fooling with their devices? Enable motion detection, which keeps the cam on in the phone. Might not work for many, but I'd like to see texting and driving fined in the same way as DUIs. Same problem: irresponsibility.
Which exonerates Google..... no.
Google of course, has NO idea that you clicked. Nope, never, nada. /sarcasm.
Google sells the ad.
You click the ad.
Google gets the click, and gets paid.
Advertiser gets the http_referrer, but in doing so, also gets the user IP address. Every IP address in IPv4 space is a known destination.
What was your question, again?
And each click gets them an IP address, and a history and an object. Who do you think you're kidding? Click-thrus are insanely read by each of the advertisers, and in turn, as no agreement exists at this phase, does WHAT THEY WANT with the data.
Advertisers see 100% of the clicks. 100%. Not nothing, 100%. Why? C'mon. You think we're stupid??
So that the car could be made in the living room.
Everyone forgot the size of the door....
There are well-known methods of avoiding browser fingerprinting, and supercookies are easily eliminated.
Hints: use multiple browsers; rename innocuous cookies to the filename of well-known supercookies, then use whatever is appropriate for your operating system to make the cookie R/O. Some of us don't use gmail (or google) at all, and many more use a separate browser for social media, sometimes several of them. It's also fun to go to the library and copy salient cookie files from their browsers (easily done) and then copy them into your favorite browser's storage to salt things up. YMMV.
Which is why it's a great idea to kill your cookies frequently. A few years from now, I'll find a thrift store with wearables, don some random ones, and freakout some database analysts.
Wow-- Ernie-- look at this! J Lo, Rod Canion, and Merle Haggard Jr are passing thru this train station! Look!
I vaguely remember that during the nomination of Judge Bork to the SCOTUS, his video rental habits revelation spawned a law that forbids such things, but the details are eluding me.
But that's the US, and not the rest of the world, and is likely to be done eventually. The data is voluminous, the motives evil.
Happens right now. Google gets your permission to vacuum the contents of Gmail, liberate data from your Android phone, and then somehow, removing "personal identifiable information", liberates this data and sells it to others, who reassemble the information.
Permission, I believe within this context, is another of Schmidt's reality distortions. The Internet of Crap will indeed require interactions, and they'll be two states for you to interact: by the facade of your permission, and by devices querying your to obtain metadata to interact with you and then send the results to some hadoop cluster in SeaLandia for, um, additional processing.
When you look at atmospheric maps, the amount of space debris is truly horrendous. No space garbagemen are going up there, tidying things up, then coming back to earth with a load of space trash-- unless we have details the military aren't confessing to.
If you're trying to put satellites into LEOs, you must also contend with all of the other junk already there, most working but some not. Yes, they decay. Could take weeks, could take centuries. I say: pay the freaking money and just wire fibre, multimode, pay the damn bill, and get over it. Fiber done well has the ability to go far beyond gigabit to the bedroom. Use low power/low radius tranceivers, like we do with cellular and WiFi technologies (among others) to give that all important Facebook search at the beach.
I'm not worried so much about ulterior motives. I'm worried about all that space junk when the upgrade.
Hello tech support? Can you, um, upgrade our 2400 satellites to gigabit, please? Sure, I'll hold.
Nice work, but serious hubris and marketing going on here. Google can't seem to find a product these days, and this is just another attempt to get in on the non-robotic servant market. I wish they'd read the scifi books inspiring their products to the freaking end of the book.
Indentured servants, just like those within the nooses of student loans.
As an industry, a gaggle of monopolies, and true, oligopoly. Said differently: a couple of them have at least the facade of trying to be reasonable, and while admittedly planes stay in the air and land safely these days, that should have been a pre-requisite.
More than two million flight miles later, I won't fly on half the carriers in the USA, and British Airways is added to the list for multiple sins of mismanagement.
And this guy is a hero, IMHO.
The effing games played by the monopolies need every modern legal arrow possible to surmount their bought-off fortresses.
You make a mistake in conflating social justice to a reaction like this. Defense/defence of social justice and free speech are highly compatible.
The post is about control of hideous, if free speech. I'm on the side of both free speech and social justice. Many others are, too.
And my point is that the chain of authorities is broken, and needs to be fixed, and anyone not doing MD5s are at risk. I would do these anyway. Lots of others don't.
It's nice to try to deflate this, but the blunder and the QA mistake remain. As I like to hesitate on the side of caution, I'd change this quickly. Just agreeing that one screwed up and not halting distribution for this head-desk sort of error -- in the face of the enormous security risk endowed -- isn't quite satisfactory.
I'm here to punish no one, but in a crazy sort of way, I find this one to be a bit mind-boggling, to the tune that each and every appliance that wasn't independently MD5'd is now a freaking five star security risk. Chain of authorities are tremendously important, and reasonable people would believe, mistakenly, that all is fine, when none of it now is, because the chain of authorities chain has been broken, and for what I know, from its inception.
So you're telling me to cool down, and I'm telling you that every single Docker implementation is now reasonably suspect, because of this go-lightly screw-up.
Seems as though you're giving them a free ride for a rather poorly implemented message. And this is Slashdot, where we'll fight if we feel like it.
Docker's been pretty loose and fast, and "not taking that message seriously yet" in a supposedly production environment seems a bit sophomoric.
How many years have we been talking about this. The FTC launches *a few* lawsuits, NOT THE FBI, who handles criminal litigation. Did you even read the summary? WTF.