It means some developer honey potted users into giving them access to their email by offering users access to some lame deal of the day website.
I don't see the problem. If people want to exchange share their emails for internet goodies, that's up to them. The point is that this was fully voluntary and obvious to the user.
These people explicitly signed up for the service and granted it access. Look at the screen caps in the linked article: https://amp.thisisinsider.com/...
It says right there "VIEW... YOUR EMAIL IN GMAIL". If you were dumb enough to do this, and want to undo it, just go to your account settings and revoke that developers' access.
Your assumption is that one of these groups will stop advancing while the other catches up and that doesn't make sense unless some catastrophe occurs.
No, I assume that the chance that two races will not advance at exactly the same rate over 10k, 100k, or millions of years.
If, in 10,000 years, homo sapiens are flying through space at.9 the speed of light, would they even care that chimpanzees had started making and using fire for food preparation?
No, but in 1 million years they'd care if chimps were competing with them for the same limited set of habitable planets.
You're assuming that genocide is a genetic trait, when it isn't. Ethics are taught.
Genocide is a word with moral implications. You should ask if the drive to advance your own species / family line over others is a genetic trait. Which it will be, because any species / family with this mentality is going to wipe the floor with one that doesn't.
If we met an advanced space-faring species, what would be their advantage in treating us with respect? Anything they want to know about us they could learn through subjugation. Leaving us to our own devices leaves open the chance that in another 10,000 years we'd be competing with them.
Ethics are taught.
Humans have been warring since they figured out that banding together offered a survival advantage. There were no "ethics", just the drive to survive and propagate.
1. They're not selling me any toys at or above cost, not for a couple decades now.
Our ability to think about concepts abstractly it what separates us from the lower life forms. It's why most of us come here to post. This is opposed to just telling the internet facts about our boring lives.
Trolling just to get people's emotions to flare up doesn't excite or interest me, and certainly nobody pays me to post.
I should not have spoken in absolutes. I'm sure there are exceptions. You did not however say anything about why you feel the need to post as AC.
How are people supposed to trust you actually believe in what you are saying if you can't even put a pseudonym next to your post? You have to admit it makes it kind of hard to take you seriously.
You can still review and write articles about Nvidia products without signing the NDA. What's going on is that Nvidia is trading privileged access for control over the articles. Nvidia gives journalists the ability to make money from writing early to press, special access articles about Nvidia products in trade for control over the content.
I didn't say voice chat wasn't toxic. I said chat is toxic. This thing about voice chat is you can turn it off. I guess you could also put tape over your screen on the chat window though. Fair enough.
It's amazing to think there are people who actually believe this type of crap.
There isn't. You read the posts of a Russian troll or trolls that're just trying to rattle the American beehive.
See how they are all AC? Anyone that posts AC is either a bought and paid for troll, or they feel so weakly about their convictions that they can't even attach a mostly-anonymous pseudonym to their posts. Either way ignore them and mod into oblivion.
Okay so let me get this straight. Trump crafted the tariffs to hit states where his approval is high like Texas, but go easy on states that he proclaims to hate like California.
WTF are you saying? This is some leftist plot, except somehow the leftists tricked Trump into doing their bidding?
No, you can't really wear it or put anything in that pocket, but look at the face of the other players when they see how fabulous your character is looking now!*
Girls have been buying clothes for their dolls and boys have been buying guns and accessories for their action figures since the dawn of time.
Some 3D model that's probably re-used again and again with different textures, took half an hour for some game artist to produce a shitload of them that the company can now charge you premium for
So you think the mass-produced physical toys are sold to you at cost?
Anyway, you aren't paying for the 30 minutes of the designer's time. You are paying for the infrastructure of developers, designers, servers, admins, and bandwidth that allows you to run around in a world with those goodies.
This assumption about my motives completely denigrates your position
The only thing I assumed was that you were putting this into the context of the investigation into Hilary. Which you were, since you freaking quoted it yourself in your own post, to which I responded. Go ahead and press pgup and check it out for yourself.
They aren't so much worried about cheating in exam rooms; that's easy to fix, just take away mobile phones. They are worried about students taking an exam and then posting the questions and answers on social media afterwards. Not all students sit the exams at the exact same time so the ones taking them later could benefit from prior knowledge of the test content.
If that's true, isn't it solved by restricting mobile / camera devices, and ensuring that each student that is given a test returns a test?
Or by having all students take the test at the same time? Or having several versions of the test for a few well-defined testing time slots?
Sure neither of those are easy, but it has to be easier and less disruptive than hitting the internet's off button. Maybe it's just too corrupt to ensure these things.
Not sure if you are being intentionally obtuse or just unaware of your own language.
Enough laws were already violated by previous administrations who shall remain nameless. Violating more laws just to get at them isn't an answer.
You are softening the issues with Trump by at the same time pointing out that the previous admin did it also, and did it a lot. That's "whataboutism". If you have issues with the previous admin, lobby your elected officials to investigate, prosecute and sentence. Don't use it to soften or excuse Trumps's dealings.
Downvote if you want, the fact remains you support a president that said publicly that the US should "give it a try" abolishing term limits, using China as the shining example. http://www.businessinsider.com...
I'd have to see how that poll was formulated. Because my first reaction to that is "bullshit!"
Exactly. Anything you don't like or doesn't fit your narrative: BULLSHIT.
Trump HIMSELF was quoted as saying that the US should consider abolishing term limits (like China): http://www.businessinsider.com...
It's a quote dude. He said it. There's no dispute on that.
Enough laws were already violated by previous administrations who shall remain nameless.
That's called "whataboutism". You dismiss things like suggesting the constitution should be changed to allow Trump to be king with "well, OBAMA DID OTHER STUFF!!!". Seriously, how about just judging each situation on it's merits? I learned when I was 4 that two wrongs don't make a right. If you think Obama committed some terrible crimes, GO GET HIM. What's stopping the Republican house, senate, and presidency from opening an investigation into Obama? Aren't you upset with your R elected officials that they are letting Obama off the hook after he committed all those crimes? Why are you voting for people that let criminals like Obama go free?
Is it the same legal territory you might discuss when the DNC/Clinton machine spent money to hire foreign agents to spend time in Russia obtaining phony info from government agents there?
Your "facts". My "facts".
If H committed such atrocious crimes, why isn't she in jail or at least being prosecuted. We have an executive branch that won with chants of "lock her up". We have republicans controlling all branches of government. Republicans that have been foaming at the mouth to have H burned at the stake for going on a decade now. Why?
The answer, of course, is that there's no evidence to LOCK HER UP. If there was it'd have been done or being done.
But wait, maybe it's the justice dept that are letting her escape? You know, the FBI that organization full of tree hugging, gluten intolerant homosexual left-wing commies that would naturally support someone like H?
I find Fi better because I pay for the data I use. If I don't use it, I don't pay for it. And that, to me, is BETTER.
In theory it is. In practice Fi ends up being considerably more expensive that other plans.
E.g., I have a T-Mobile 5GB + Binge on plan. It's $30 a month. A 5GB plan on Fi is $70 / month, and doesn't benefit from Binge meaning in practice I'd use 2x+ as much data that actually counts against my cap on Fi.
To be fair that's the old T-mo 5GB plan that's not offered anymore. I priced a 3x family plan at 10GB (2x the data) a month though and it's only like $5 / month more (if I bought 3 lines, which I would).
I don't like all the nonsense of Binge and which services are supported and which aren't and the so-called unlimited plans and throttling, but I'm not going to pay almost 2x as much a month out of principle. In practice I never exhaust my data plan and never come close to the throttling limits. That's the reality. It works for 99.9% of us, and it's only the dopes tethering their homes to their mobile plan that are complaining about throttling and caps.
The contents of my brain are my property. The main problem aren't genuine 'trade secrets', it's that employers want to define completely standard approaches like 'iterative processes' as theirs. If you sign, you've agreed to that, they have shysters on staff, you can't afford to fight it.
I guess you should link to some instances of past employees being sued for disclosing things like "iterative processes" if you want us to get all hot and bothered about this.
Write 'I don't agree' (somewhat legibly) on the confidentiality agreement/non-disclosure/non-compete signature line and hand it across the table. They NEVER check.
Or, you could just not accept the contract and work somewhere else instead of trying to trick your prospective employer into hiring you.
I would be far more concerned about companies like Uber, Verizon, and AT&T opposing this.
You don't have to be an advertising company to horde user data and sell it. That was the big stink around Facebook. Not that they were providing targeted advertising, but that they were selling unrestricted use of the raw data to companies like Cambridge Analytica.
Slashdot Mirror
It means some developer honey potted users into giving them access to their email by offering users access to some lame deal of the day website.
I don't see the problem. If people want to exchange share their emails for internet goodies, that's up to them. The point is that this was fully voluntary and obvious to the user.
These people explicitly signed up for the service and granted it access. Look at the screen caps in the linked article:
https://amp.thisisinsider.com/...
It says right there "VIEW ... YOUR EMAIL IN GMAIL". If you were dumb enough to do this, and want to undo it, just go to your account settings and revoke that developers' access.
Your assumption is that one of these groups will stop advancing while the other catches up and that doesn't make sense unless some catastrophe occurs.
No, I assume that the chance that two races will not advance at exactly the same rate over 10k, 100k, or millions of years.
If, in 10,000 years, homo sapiens are flying through space at .9 the speed of light, would they even care that chimpanzees had started making and using fire for food preparation?
No, but in 1 million years they'd care if chimps were competing with them for the same limited set of habitable planets.
You're assuming that genocide is a genetic trait, when it isn't. Ethics are taught.
Genocide is a word with moral implications. You should ask if the drive to advance your own species / family line over others is a genetic trait. Which it will be, because any species / family with this mentality is going to wipe the floor with one that doesn't.
If we met an advanced space-faring species, what would be their advantage in treating us with respect? Anything they want to know about us they could learn through subjugation. Leaving us to our own devices leaves open the chance that in another 10,000 years we'd be competing with them.
Ethics are taught.
Humans have been warring since they figured out that banding together offered a survival advantage. There were no "ethics", just the drive to survive and propagate.
Who taught our closest relatives, the Chimps, their ethics?
https://www.usatoday.com/story...: https://www.usatoday.com/story...
Murder 'comes naturally' to chimpanzees: https://www.bbc.com/news/scien...
Monkey see, monkey kill: The evolutionary roots of lethal combat: http://www.latimes.com/science...
1. They're not selling me any toys at or above cost, not for a couple decades now.
Our ability to think about concepts abstractly it what separates us from the lower life forms. It's why most of us come here to post. This is opposed to just telling the internet facts about our boring lives.
Trolling just to get people's emotions to flare up doesn't excite or interest me, and certainly nobody pays me to post.
I should not have spoken in absolutes. I'm sure there are exceptions. You did not however say anything about why you feel the need to post as AC.
How are people supposed to trust you actually believe in what you are saying if you can't even put a pseudonym next to your post? You have to admit it makes it kind of hard to take you seriously.
You can still review and write articles about Nvidia products without signing the NDA. What's going on is that Nvidia is trading privileged access for control over the articles. Nvidia gives journalists the ability to make money from writing early to press, special access articles about Nvidia products in trade for control over the content.
I didn't say voice chat wasn't toxic. I said chat is toxic. This thing about voice chat is you can turn it off. I guess you could also put tape over your screen on the chat window though. Fair enough.
It's amazing to think there are people who actually believe this type of crap.
There isn't. You read the posts of a Russian troll or trolls that're just trying to rattle the American beehive.
See how they are all AC? Anyone that posts AC is either a bought and paid for troll, or they feel so weakly about their convictions that they can't even attach a mostly-anonymous pseudonym to their posts. Either way ignore them and mod into oblivion.
Maybe that helps make it clear.
Okay so let me get this straight. Trump crafted the tariffs to hit states where his approval is high like Texas, but go easy on states that he proclaims to hate like California.
WTF are you saying? This is some leftist plot, except somehow the leftists tricked Trump into doing their bidding?
... food - who do you think will hurt the most?
Food? Um, everyone that eats food?
They don't have public text chat because it universally ends up being toxic. That's a smart move.
Whoosh.
No, you can't really wear it or put anything in that pocket, but look at the face of the other players when they see how fabulous your character is looking now!*
Girls have been buying clothes for their dolls and boys have been buying guns and accessories for their action figures since the dawn of time.
Some 3D model that's probably re-used again and again with different textures, took half an hour for some game artist to produce a shitload of them that the company can now charge you premium for
So you think the mass-produced physical toys are sold to you at cost?
Anyway, you aren't paying for the 30 minutes of the designer's time. You are paying for the infrastructure of developers, designers, servers, admins, and bandwidth that allows you to run around in a world with those goodies.
This assumption about my motives completely denigrates your position
The only thing I assumed was that you were putting this into the context of the investigation into Hilary. Which you were, since you freaking quoted it yourself in your own post, to which I responded. Go ahead and press pgup and check it out for yourself.
They aren't so much worried about cheating in exam rooms; that's easy to fix, just take away mobile phones. They are worried about students taking an exam and then posting the questions and answers on social media afterwards. Not all students sit the exams at the exact same time so the ones taking them later could benefit from prior knowledge of the test content.
If that's true, isn't it solved by restricting mobile / camera devices, and ensuring that each student that is given a test returns a test?
Or by having all students take the test at the same time? Or having several versions of the test for a few well-defined testing time slots?
Sure neither of those are easy, but it has to be easier and less disruptive than hitting the internet's off button. Maybe it's just too corrupt to ensure these things.
Not sure if you are being intentionally obtuse or just unaware of your own language.
Enough laws were already violated by previous administrations who shall remain nameless.
Violating more laws just to get at them isn't an answer.
You are softening the issues with Trump by at the same time pointing out that the previous admin did it also, and did it a lot. That's "whataboutism". If you have issues with the previous admin, lobby your elected officials to investigate, prosecute and sentence. Don't use it to soften or excuse Trumps's dealings.
Downvote if you want, the fact remains you support a president that said publicly that the US should "give it a try" abolishing term limits, using China as the shining example.
http://www.businessinsider.com...
I'd have to see how that poll was formulated. Because my first reaction to that is "bullshit!"
Exactly. Anything you don't like or doesn't fit your narrative: BULLSHIT.
Trump HIMSELF was quoted as saying that the US should consider abolishing term limits (like China):
http://www.businessinsider.com...
It's a quote dude. He said it. There's no dispute on that.
Enough laws were already violated by previous administrations who shall remain nameless.
That's called "whataboutism". You dismiss things like suggesting the constitution should be changed to allow Trump to be king with "well, OBAMA DID OTHER STUFF!!!". Seriously, how about just judging each situation on it's merits? I learned when I was 4 that two wrongs don't make a right. If you think Obama committed some terrible crimes, GO GET HIM. What's stopping the Republican house, senate, and presidency from opening an investigation into Obama? Aren't you upset with your R elected officials that they are letting Obama off the hook after he committed all those crimes? Why are you voting for people that let criminals like Obama go free?
term limits would have very little appeal
You make my point well.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Willing to throw the constitution out the window, to burn a few SJWs.
He's gone in 8 if you continue acting this way (and then gets replaced by someone just like him).
Are you sure?
Poll: More than half of Republicans would support postponing 2020 election
https://www.usatoday.com/story...
Welcome to the New America, where conservatives care more about putting SJWs in their place than little things like terms limits.
Is it the same legal territory you might discuss when the DNC/Clinton machine spent money to hire foreign agents to spend time in Russia obtaining phony info from government agents there?
Your "facts". My "facts".
If H committed such atrocious crimes, why isn't she in jail or at least being prosecuted. We have an executive branch that won with chants of "lock her up". We have republicans controlling all branches of government. Republicans that have been foaming at the mouth to have H burned at the stake for going on a decade now. Why?
The answer, of course, is that there's no evidence to LOCK HER UP. If there was it'd have been done or being done.
But wait, maybe it's the justice dept that are letting her escape? You know, the FBI that organization full of tree hugging, gluten intolerant homosexual left-wing commies that would naturally support someone like H?
Common sense is your friend.
I find Fi better because I pay for the data I use. If I don't use it, I don't pay for it. And that, to me, is BETTER.
In theory it is. In practice Fi ends up being considerably more expensive that other plans.
E.g., I have a T-Mobile 5GB + Binge on plan. It's $30 a month. A 5GB plan on Fi is $70 / month, and doesn't benefit from Binge meaning in practice I'd use 2x+ as much data that actually counts against my cap on Fi.
To be fair that's the old T-mo 5GB plan that's not offered anymore. I priced a 3x family plan at 10GB (2x the data) a month though and it's only like $5 / month more (if I bought 3 lines, which I would).
I don't like all the nonsense of Binge and which services are supported and which aren't and the so-called unlimited plans and throttling, but I'm not going to pay almost 2x as much a month out of principle. In practice I never exhaust my data plan and never come close to the throttling limits. That's the reality. It works for 99.9% of us, and it's only the dopes tethering their homes to their mobile plan that are complaining about throttling and caps.
If I understood correctly you were saying I trade in bitcoins. I don't. Ergo you are wrong. Whoosh yourself.
You are either retarded or being deliberately obtuse. Either way, bye.
The contents of my brain are my property. The main problem aren't genuine 'trade secrets', it's that employers want to define completely standard approaches like 'iterative processes' as theirs. If you sign, you've agreed to that, they have shysters on staff, you can't afford to fight it.
I guess you should link to some instances of past employees being sued for disclosing things like "iterative processes" if you want us to get all hot and bothered about this.
Write 'I don't agree' (somewhat legibly) on the confidentiality agreement/non-disclosure/non-compete signature line and hand it across the table. They NEVER check.
Or, you could just not accept the contract and work somewhere else instead of trying to trick your prospective employer into hiring you.
I would be far more concerned about companies like Uber, Verizon, and AT&T opposing this.
You don't have to be an advertising company to horde user data and sell it. That was the big stink around Facebook. Not that they were providing targeted advertising, but that they were selling unrestricted use of the raw data to companies like Cambridge Analytica.