i guess you are talking about physically stealing a card. that's almost almost zero percent of the problem. that requires physical theft which criminals don't want to risk for the most part.
Your next creditcard (in a couple years) will probably have a chip-and-pin system
most likely chip and signature. the difference being what you'd expect... no pins, but signature verification required. the reason being that the big three are afraid people will spend less if they are forced to remember a PIN (yes, really).
chip and signature is arguably less secure, but it does prevent credit card cloning... you can't clone the chip.
hmmm. i thought the thing about Node.js is that it *isn't* concurrent, it's event driven. there's one thread for your code, although connections are queued asynchronously. so... many connections, but one thread servicing them all? http://blog.mixu.net/2011/02/0...
The real evil is the patent system itself, not the hackers who take advantage of it.
no, it's the people.
your argument is basically that individuals can only be held responsible for a heinous act if it's unequivocally disallowed by the law. that's just a cop-out that allows people to take advantage / cause harm to others, or society.
there will *never* be enough laws to cover every possible situation. that's why we have parents that hopefully taught us right and wrong and common sense
. They aren't themselves so evil, they are basically hackers, but of the law instead of tech.
no, they aren't hackers unless you mean that hackers are people that cause harm to others (only).
TWC's "basic cable" is $19.99 (for 12 months, then it goes up of course) and includes no internet. http://www.timewarnercable.com...
not to mention that basic cable doesn't really compare to a streaming service like Netflix. first is that basic cable is SD. then there's the whole "tune it at 9.30pm on tuesdays" problem.
Comcast shall for a period of five years following the effective date of the parent company merger neither oppose, directly or indirectly, nor fund opposition to, any municipal broadband development plan in California
why is it even POSSIBLE for them to oppose municipal broadband? why isn't it ILLEGAL for them to do so?
I don't think yelp would be so popular if users thought they might risk being sued by yelp if they create a review.
duh? no person with 1/2 a brain is going to fear getting sued by Yelp because they've gone after a *business* that's paid people, and been paid, to post positive reviews.
Yelp is review, that's all they are. they of course will never do something to scare away legit reviews. and yes, i'm a freaking genius for figuring that out.
I've made a habit of skipping every rating that is the maximum and every rating that is the minimum of the allowed scope. Somewhere in the 2-to-4-star gamut is the truth of the matter.
... and who would ever think of leaving a fake 4 star review? just when you thought you had the answer to life's problems, and bam.
If we continue to cultivate a society where even the most crafted and artisan digital items are throwaway flash sale detritus, how can we expect to continue enjoying the talented minds that create them?
interesting.
when profits drop to reasonable levels for music and movies, they'll get made / created by people with a love for the art, as opposed to a love for money. sounds fine.
being formalized is a good thing, because the limits / uses of that data are publicly part of that formalization. otherwise you are just in an arms race with unscrupulous corporations that will of course win in the end. but then again, maybe your PGP will protect you huh?
You have the chance of being mugged right now, but you know your life will change if mugging was legalized. It's a bit of a simplistic analogy, but it is still disturbingly accurate.
right, because having my name in some database as having traveled to Switzerland is pretty much the same as being mugged. touché my friend.
You clearly haven't even thought about what kind of technologies
no, i'm just not a fool about the pace of technology. i really hope you are right though, it's a nice thought that i'll be able to download into a fresh new body before i die.
if you think that in "decades" we'll be able to grow bodies in VATs, and download our minds to them, or otherwise have free-roaming android avatars that either have downloaded minds or are remote controled from anywhere in the world, i have a nice bridge to sell you.
moreover, do you really think we'd develop such technologies, but we'd remain stagnant, or regress our ability to track these things?
moreover, do you think you'll be able to afford such technology?
you are already trackable, you know that right? this new EU law is only about formalizing / standardizing the process. you've already lost. do you really think that you could travel to a foreign country and back and be able to hide it?
technology will soon be (if it isn't already) at a point where it will be impossible to escape surveillance. so stop worrying about that. the problem isn't that you are being surveilled, it's what can be done with the data. fight for laws about how the data can be used, and stop worrying about the existence of the data itself.
merely that it won't be able to hold its position at the top
top of what? search? is there anything even close to google? and don't say bing, because it's freaking terrible.
the rise of facebook is not going stop anyone from using search. facebook and google are orthogonal (disregarding google+). regardless, all FB can do is cram more ads into places where people don't want to see them.
"Google doesn't create immersive experiences that you get lost in,"
thank god. this is at least one of the reasons why google beat out every competitor. while yahoo! was giving you seizures with massive full screen flash ads, google shows you text based ads related to your search.
i'm sure they are right, immersive ads do work, but that's only if you have a captive audience that can't get away and are essentially forced to watch. think old-school TV ads pre-DVR. people have tried to make the web captive, and failed. if i load a news site that has popops / overs i just close the page. not because i'm anti-ad, but because it's too much.
So, I simply tell my honest experience with something, and some asshole tells me I'm wrong and to fuck off, and *I'm* the one with the problem? Fuck you.
how old were you when you discovered the "F" word makes you a big man?
If the police hired smart people, they would question laws they are told to enforce and refuse to enforce the ones they thought were unjust... and we cant have that.
yeah good plan. let's have police officers running around deciding which laws they want to enforce. also, let's have them enforce things that aren't laws that they think should be.
the idea is that before something is put into law, it's been vetted, discussed, debated and even voted on. obviously that system isn't perfect and we have a lot of terrible laws, but it's way, way better than having a group of roaming thugs deciding the law for themselves.
Uber recently announced plans to develop self-driving cars, a longtime pet project at Google
Google has been developing self-driving autos for 5+ years pouring hundreds of millions into the project. Uber has a press release to announce plans to look into self driving cars.
You're wrong, and here is the reason I will give you: I've seen it done. There it is, all your hypothetical reasons proven wrong because of data.
you clearly have no specific domain knowledge on this or you'd be giving examples. i suspect when you do give example, you are going to point out sharing of some math libraries or something similarly platform-inspecific, or sharing across mobile platforms that are based on similar architectures.
i'm talking iOS and Android, which is really what matters here.
Slashdot Mirror
but does nothing to stop stolen card fraud
i guess you are talking about physically stealing a card. that's almost almost zero percent of the problem. that requires physical theft which criminals don't want to risk for the most part.
Your next creditcard (in a couple years) will probably have a chip-and-pin system
most likely chip and signature. the difference being what you'd expect ... no pins, but signature verification required. the reason being that the big three are afraid people will spend less if they are forced to remember a PIN (yes, really).
chip and signature is arguably less secure, but it does prevent credit card cloning ... you can't clone the chip.
let's not get all high and mighty about freedom and privacy. it's about installing pirated software. call a spade a spade, that's all i'm saying.
And yet, the majority of iPhones in Asia are jailbroken. Why?
so they can installed pirated apps.
2) Node.js isn't fast. It's concurrent.
hmmm. i thought the thing about Node.js is that it *isn't* concurrent, it's event driven. there's one thread for your code, although connections are queued asynchronously. so ... many connections, but one thread servicing them all?
http://blog.mixu.net/2011/02/0...
The real evil is the patent system itself, not the hackers who take advantage of it.
no, it's the people.
your argument is basically that individuals can only be held responsible for a heinous act if it's unequivocally disallowed by the law. that's just a cop-out that allows people to take advantage / cause harm to others, or society.
there will *never* be enough laws to cover every possible situation. that's why we have parents that hopefully taught us right and wrong and common sense
. They aren't themselves so evil, they are basically hackers, but of the law instead of tech.
no, they aren't hackers unless you mean that hackers are people that cause harm to others (only).
TWC's "basic cable" is $19.99 (for 12 months, then it goes up of course) and includes no internet.
http://www.timewarnercable.com...
not to mention that basic cable doesn't really compare to a streaming service like Netflix. first is that basic cable is SD. then there's the whole "tune it at 9.30pm on tuesdays" problem.
Comcast shall for a period of five years following the effective date of the parent company merger neither oppose, directly or indirectly, nor fund opposition to, any municipal broadband development plan in California
why is it even POSSIBLE for them to oppose municipal broadband? why isn't it ILLEGAL for them to do so?
I don't think yelp would be so popular if users thought they might risk being sued by yelp if they create a review.
duh? no person with 1/2 a brain is going to fear getting sued by Yelp because they've gone after a *business* that's paid people, and been paid, to post positive reviews.
Yelp is review, that's all they are. they of course will never do something to scare away legit reviews. and yes, i'm a freaking genius for figuring that out.
I've made a habit of skipping every rating that is the maximum and every rating that is the minimum of the allowed scope. Somewhere in the 2-to-4-star gamut is the truth of the matter.
... and who would ever think of leaving a fake 4 star review? just when you thought you had the answer to life's problems, and bam.
If we continue to cultivate a society where even the most crafted and artisan digital items are throwaway flash sale detritus, how can we expect to continue enjoying the talented minds that create them?
interesting.
when profits drop to reasonable levels for music and movies, they'll get made / created by people with a love for the art, as opposed to a love for money. sounds fine.
One of them actually screamed.
tell their parents not to bother with that college fund.
thank god we phased out flash so things like this wouldn't happen ... oh wait.
The process of legalizing/formalizing something
being formalized is a good thing, because the limits / uses of that data are publicly part of that formalization. otherwise you are just in an arms race with unscrupulous corporations that will of course win in the end. but then again, maybe your PGP will protect you huh?
You have the chance of being mugged right now, but you know your life will change if mugging was legalized. It's a bit of a simplistic analogy, but it is still disturbingly accurate.
right, because having my name in some database as having traveled to Switzerland is pretty much the same as being mugged. touché my friend.
You clearly haven't even thought about what kind of technologies
no, i'm just not a fool about the pace of technology. i really hope you are right though, it's a nice thought that i'll be able to download into a fresh new body before i die.
if you think that in "decades" we'll be able to grow bodies in VATs, and download our minds to them, or otherwise have free-roaming android avatars that either have downloaded minds or are remote controled from anywhere in the world, i have a nice bridge to sell you.
moreover, do you really think we'd develop such technologies, but we'd remain stagnant, or regress our ability to track these things?
moreover, do you think you'll be able to afford such technology?
and yes, clearly, i have thought about these technologies,
http://www.amazon.com/Altered-...
the harder we work to avoid it
you are already trackable, you know that right? this new EU law is only about formalizing / standardizing the process. you've already lost. do you really think that you could travel to a foreign country and back and be able to hide it?
that's completely the wrong thought path.
technology will soon be (if it isn't already) at a point where it will be impossible to escape surveillance. so stop worrying about that. the problem isn't that you are being surveilled, it's what can be done with the data. fight for laws about how the data can be used, and stop worrying about the existence of the data itself.
merely that it won't be able to hold its position at the top
top of what? search? is there anything even close to google? and don't say bing, because it's freaking terrible.
the rise of facebook is not going stop anyone from using search. facebook and google are orthogonal (disregarding google+). regardless, all FB can do is cram more ads into places where people don't want to see them.
trying to find something as good as google was five years ago
look for a startup that isn't held responsible to investors.
"Google doesn't create immersive experiences that you get lost in,"
thank god. this is at least one of the reasons why google beat out every competitor. while yahoo! was giving you seizures with massive full screen flash ads, google shows you text based ads related to your search.
i'm sure they are right, immersive ads do work, but that's only if you have a captive audience that can't get away and are essentially forced to watch. think old-school TV ads pre-DVR. people have tried to make the web captive, and failed. if i load a news site that has popops / overs i just close the page. not because i'm anti-ad, but because it's too much.
So, I simply tell my honest experience with something, and some asshole tells me I'm wrong and to fuck off, and *I'm* the one with the problem? Fuck you.
how old were you when you discovered the "F" word makes you a big man?
If the police hired smart people, they would question laws they are told to enforce and refuse to enforce the ones they thought were unjust... and we cant have that.
yeah good plan. let's have police officers running around deciding which laws they want to enforce. also, let's have them enforce things that aren't laws that they think should be.
the idea is that before something is put into law, it's been vetted, discussed, debated and even voted on. obviously that system isn't perfect and we have a lot of terrible laws, but it's way, way better than having a group of roaming thugs deciding the law for themselves.
Uber recently announced plans to develop self-driving cars, a longtime pet project at Google
Google has been developing self-driving autos for 5+ years pouring hundreds of millions into the project. Uber has a press release to announce plans to look into self driving cars.
Google should be worried.
man i saw that red "foe" icon, and you didn't disappoint.
you're a bright, shining example of humanity. don't let anyone tell you different.
You're wrong, and here is the reason I will give you: I've seen it done. There it is, all your hypothetical reasons proven wrong because of data.
you clearly have no specific domain knowledge on this or you'd be giving examples. i suspect when you do give example, you are going to point out sharing of some math libraries or something similarly platform-inspecific, or sharing across mobile platforms that are based on similar architectures.
i'm talking iOS and Android, which is really what matters here.