Perhaps they already get it. I know in Belgium (at least in Brussels) people older than 65 are able to just pick up their free public transport. The thing is that this might me an issue because they are old. e.g. walking to a bus stop 500m away, wait for the bus for 10 minutes, climb on the bus, hold on or hope to sit before the bus leaves, get of the high bus, walk 200 meters to where they need to be. That is all pretty standard if you are able, but not if you are old.\Compare that to walking 5 meters to your car. Get in (without being stressed that it takes longer and people are behind you) and drive where you need to be.
I have seen it with my mom who was unable to walk 500 meters, but was still driving. Eventually she have up, because she understood it was too dangerous(*) and shortly after that had to go to a home.
I just hope that when I am that age that self driving cars are a real thing and I can just call one and use it as public transport if not for anything else but do shopping.
(*)If you notice you are a bad driver, you have been a bad driver for a long time.
That is a discusion I had with a lawyer friend. Is e.g. murder illegal. Her point was that it is not as such. It is just that if you get caught under specific circumstances you will get a punishment, not because it is illegal. The law here says that IF you murder THEN you get X amount of jail time. The law does not specifically say that the murder is illegal.
This just as a point of discussion asd I agree with the rest. Not all crimes are the same. The worst cime is calling a fat bitch a fat bitch. At least that is what I understand of the PC movement.
Sometimes the cheating part is the fun part. I remember once that I had a way to cheat. Basically a paper on an elastic band that I could pull out and then let go in my sleeve of my jacket.
I even told the teacher that I was going to cheat. I cheated and did not get caught. Did I need to cheat? No. I did not even need to look at the cheat sheet,but did anyway, because it was fun.
If I would have had the Internet as a kid I could imagine that I would have tried something similar. Especially after watching something like Wargames.
At this moment the kid was a cracker, this is a great opportunity to turn him in to a hacker. (Those terms are the original terms)
There is a reasson I can not do what they ask : GDPR. And they are lucky. I just saved them 20.000.000 EUR in fines. And if you say that by then Brexit will have been completed and/or the GDPR will not apply, just you wait and see what happens. You are clearly not one of us. Also do not ask to change the past. We did that once. Now Trump is POSTUS. Well, could have been worse. No, not Clinton. We change history, not politics.
Just before the last elections people here in Europe told me that Trump would never win. My answer always was:"Remember that they re-elected Bush." I would not be surpised if they re-elected Trump.
The best thing you do is shoot the owner of the doorbell. You will notice that there will be a serious decline in the number of crimes that need to be solved as well the fact that those people will see a serious decrease in repeat crimes. That can only mean one thing: It works because the guilty person is punished.
We could even go one step further and shoot those people who own said doorbell and prevent a LOT of crime.
As a practical matter, we've known for centuries that democracies overcriminalize because it is in the interests of legislators to never be blamed for letting a bad person out of jail.
Uh, no. "Innocent until proven guilty" by definition means that guilty people WILL walk free. The fact that this is seen as such in the US is unrelated to other democracies. I am sure that every country has plenty of cases where they KNEW who the guilty where and still let them go, because of the due process. e.g. letting people go because their case has aged. If this where not the case, there would not be a time limit on many types of crime.
So, no, you are wrong. The reason democracies have so many laws is because there are so many expectations and rules. If I where the sole ruler I would only need one law "I am always right and I decide what punishment will be." This could be different from day by day on how I feel, but there would be only one law.
Overcriminalyze is a pure US invention where people are found guilty of crimes that are not even crimes and then convince other countries to adapt these laws.
The Dutch law also sees uncrypted emails as "postcards" in such that is it unreasonable to expect security from it and it is to be expected that others will (not can) read them. Encrypted ones are more like a letter in a sealed envelope, where opening them is clearly breaking the law. Reading a postcard not addressed to you? OK. Opening a letter not addressed to you? You are now a criminal.
"knowingly and with intent to defraud, accesses a protected computer without authorization, or exceeds authorized access"
But he did not do any of that. He did not defraud anybody. He did not access a protected computer (with or without authorization). He did not exceed the authorized access as no authorization was given.
It is as if you walk on the grass in a public park where it is allowed and then be arrested because you walked on all of the grass over time, walking back and forth.
So even if he did it to sell it to the Russians and had any intend to sell it, that does not make it illegal.
I have done a simmilar thing in the past where a friend asked me to rip a website so he would have info on companies, so he could sell his product to those companies by knowing how much they needed. This was public available information. All I did was automate the process instead of him going through it page by page. Got a few beers out of it.
In Belgium working at a bank means you have spmething like 40 paid holidays. That on top of an above average lincomeand they still make money. Seems that they could go for shorter worling hours
Much of that negotiation is automated. There is a top price, a bottom price and the computer tells them what to say.
And that is just for big loans. Small ones are done online. If you go to a bank for a small loan, like a car or credit card, the person is basically a button pusher doing the data entry for you. They even told me that it was possible to do this at the convinience of my home when I was at the bank.
Question: do you go to a teller to get money or do you go to the ATM? Many people still like to go to the bank. Especially older people. There are already fewer people working in bsnking. I hardly go to a bank. Last thing I did was send a question via a webform. That sees to it that the answer can be given with less time used by the person answering. E.g. autentification is alteadu done. No need to look up the account.
Only that means that you need about 50% of the time. Now guess if they are givong that back to the people in ectra free time to baance the work/home time or if they are going to fire 50% of those people. And even if they do not fore anybody, you can be sure they do not hire new people.
And that is just a form. Not even any AI involved.
You only need that if it is a plane and this isn't. (Most likely to be Ubers defense). Also not flying actually, it is moving on a not-ground surface. So no need to follow the FAA. And the people who are to work for us are not slaves, they are forced volunteers. (Oh wait, that is not yet publicly know as a business plan yet)
Yep, that is unfortunately how it is. I am sure AB Inbev as a Brazillian-Belgian company would LOVE to sell beer to people from 16 years on as they are allowed to do in Belgium. Yet they are not allowed to do so. You do business there, you follow the rules. Do not like the rules? Do not do business there. That means that if you provide a free service to there Europeans, you cut them off and then tell your advertisers that your users have goinbe down by 50% and you take the loss.
Here you have even been informaed on how to do that. Just Geoblock the whole of the EU.
In a way, yes. Although not directly, he will be responsible directly for any mishaps. So if an incompetent person is hired, there will be almost certainly a higher penalty for the company to pay.
Understand that the fine is upto 4% of yearly worldwide revenue, not the standard. So instead of paying say 0.5%, they suddenly pay 2%. And that is the company that pays, not the person.
The reasdon the law is there is because of why ALL laws are there. Some assholes abused whatever was possible and we do not agree with the behaviour. This goes for laws about e.g. murdering people, rap, stealing to any law you can think of.
As they where unable to make a self driving car that does not kill people, a flying car might be just what they want. And perhaps the FAA is a lot easier to deal with to bend the rules. (That was a bit sarcastic. Sorry, not sorry.)
Slashdot Mirror
You are somehow confirming his point. I would go for another example.
Perhaps they already get it. I know in Belgium (at least in Brussels) people older than 65 are able to just pick up their free public transport.
The thing is that this might me an issue because they are old. e.g. walking to a bus stop 500m away, wait for the bus for 10 minutes, climb on the bus, hold on or hope to sit before the bus leaves, get of the high bus, walk 200 meters to where they need to be. That is all pretty standard if you are able, but not if you are old.\Compare that to walking 5 meters to your car. Get in (without being stressed that it takes longer and people are behind you) and drive where you need to be.
I have seen it with my mom who was unable to walk 500 meters, but was still driving. Eventually she have up, because she understood it was too dangerous(*) and shortly after that had to go to a home.
I just hope that when I am that age that self driving cars are a real thing and I can just call one and use it as public transport if not for anything else but do shopping.
(*)If you notice you are a bad driver, you have been a bad driver for a long time.
Well, he was against interest, so there's that.
That is a discusion I had with a lawyer friend. Is e.g. murder illegal. Her point was that it is not as such. It is just that if you get caught under specific circumstances you will get a punishment, not because it is illegal.
The law here says that IF you murder THEN you get X amount of jail time. The law does not specifically say that the murder is illegal.
This just as a point of discussion asd I agree with the rest. Not all crimes are the same. The worst cime is calling a fat bitch a fat bitch. At least that is what I understand of the PC movement.
Sometimes the cheating part is the fun part. I remember once that I had a way to cheat. Basically a paper on an elastic band that I could pull out and then let go in my sleeve of my jacket.
I even told the teacher that I was going to cheat. I cheated and did not get caught. Did I need to cheat? No. I did not even need to look at the cheat sheet,but did anyway, because it was fun.
If I would have had the Internet as a kid I could imagine that I would have tried something similar. Especially after watching something like Wargames.
At this moment the kid was a cracker, this is a great opportunity to turn him in to a hacker. (Those terms are the original terms)
There is a reasson I can not do what they ask : GDPR. And they are lucky. I just saved them 20.000.000 EUR in fines. And if you say that by then Brexit will have been completed and/or the GDPR will not apply, just you wait and see what happens. You are clearly not one of us.
Also do not ask to change the past. We did that once. Now Trump is POSTUS. Well, could have been worse. No, not Clinton. We change history, not politics.
Thhink also of the 0 calories of tic tacs, even when they are pure sugar.
Just before the last elections people here in Europe told me that Trump would never win. My answer always was :"Remember that they re-elected Bush."
I would not be surpised if they re-elected Trump.
I rather be robbed (And I have been) then have cameras all over the place.
The best thing you do is shoot the owner of the doorbell. You will notice that there will be a serious decline in the number of crimes that need to be solved as well the fact that those people will see a serious decrease in repeat crimes.
That can only mean one thing: It works because the guilty person is punished.
We could even go one step further and shoot those people who own said doorbell and prevent a LOT of crime.
Uh, no. "Innocent until proven guilty" by definition means that guilty people WILL walk free. The fact that this is seen as such in the US is unrelated to other democracies.
I am sure that every country has plenty of cases where they KNEW who the guilty where and still let them go, because of the due process. e.g. letting people go because their case has aged. If this where not the case, there would not be a time limit on many types of crime.
So, no, you are wrong. The reason democracies have so many laws is because there are so many expectations and rules. If I where the sole ruler I would only need one law "I am always right and I decide what punishment will be." This could be different from day by day on how I feel, but there would be only one law.
Overcriminalyze is a pure US invention where people are found guilty of crimes that are not even crimes and then convince other countries to adapt these laws.
The Dutch law also sees uncrypted emails as "postcards" in such that is it unreasonable to expect security from it and it is to be expected that others will (not can) read them.
Encrypted ones are more like a letter in a sealed envelope, where opening them is clearly breaking the law.
Reading a postcard not addressed to you? OK.
Opening a letter not addressed to you? You are now a criminal.
"knowingly and with intent to defraud, accesses a protected computer without authorization, or exceeds authorized access"
But he did not do any of that. He did not defraud anybody. He did not access a protected computer (with or without authorization). He did not exceed the authorized access as no authorization was given.
It is as if you walk on the grass in a public park where it is allowed and then be arrested because you walked on all of the grass over time, walking back and forth.
So even if he did it to sell it to the Russians and had any intend to sell it, that does not make it illegal.
I have done a simmilar thing in the past where a friend asked me to rip a website so he would have info on companies, so he could sell his product to those companies by knowing how much they needed.
This was public available information. All I did was automate the process instead of him going through it page by page. Got a few beers out of it.
In Belgium working at a bank means you have spmething like 40 paid holidays. That on top of an above average lincomeand they still make money.
Seems that they could go for shorter worling hours
Train the people? They are unable to pay for it now. Less working hours? Now THAT is what socialism is about. So why not start with that?
Much of that negotiation is automated. There is a top price, a bottom price and the computer tells them what to say.
And that is just for big loans. Small ones are done online. If you go to a bank for a small loan, like a car or credit card, the person is basically a button pusher doing the data entry for you. They even told me that it was possible to do this at the convinience of my home when I was at the bank.
Question: do you go to a teller to get money or do you go to the ATM? Many people still like to go to the bank. Especially older people. There are already fewer people working in bsnking.
I hardly go to a bank. Last thing I did was send a question via a webform. That sees to it that the answer can be given with less time used by the person answering. E.g. autentification is alteadu done. No need to look up the account.
Only that means that you need about 50% of the time. Now guess if they are givong that back to the people in ectra free time to baance the work/home time or if they are going to fire 50% of those people. And even if they do not fore anybody, you can be sure they do not hire new people.
And that is just a form. Not even any AI involved.
There is a difference between having a job and having something to do.
You only need that if it is a plane and this isn't. (Most likely to be Ubers defense). Also not flying actually, it is moving on a not-ground surface. So no need to follow the FAA.
And the people who are to work for us are not slaves, they are forced volunteers. (Oh wait, that is not yet publicly know as a business plan yet)
Why woud they make an Air Taxi? They are not a taxi company.
The thing is, the law does not forbid the Europeans to hand over their data. It talks about people who receive the data and what they do with it.
Yep, that is unfortunately how it is. I am sure AB Inbev as a Brazillian-Belgian company would LOVE to sell beer to people from 16 years on as they are allowed to do in Belgium. Yet they are not allowed to do so.
You do business there, you follow the rules. Do not like the rules? Do not do business there.
That means that if you provide a free service to there Europeans, you cut them off and then tell your advertisers that your users have goinbe down by 50% and you take the loss.
Here you have even been informaed on how to do that. Just Geoblock the whole of the EU.
In a way, yes. Although not directly, he will be responsible directly for any mishaps. So if an incompetent person is hired, there will be almost certainly a higher penalty for the company to pay.
Understand that the fine is upto 4% of yearly worldwide revenue, not the standard. So instead of paying say 0.5%, they suddenly pay 2%. And that is the company that pays, not the person.
The reasdon the law is there is because of why ALL laws are there. Some assholes abused whatever was possible and we do not agree with the behaviour.
This goes for laws about e.g. murdering people, rap, stealing to any law you can think of.
As they where unable to make a self driving car that does not kill people, a flying car might be just what they want. And perhaps the FAA is a lot easier to deal with to bend the rules.
(That was a bit sarcastic. Sorry, not sorry.)