Apple spends a shitton on marketing, and I have never bought an Apple product. Either I am a far stonger willed person than you, or marketing doesn't control me 100%. You decide.
Framing it as if it were an issue of being controlled 100% is just misdirection. The issue is that free markets are predicated on basis of both parties being fully informed. Marketing and other forms of manipulation explicitly seek to control how well informed the consumer is - such as requiring non-disclosures in settlements for defective products.
I do find the many conflicting faces of slashdot amusing - on one hand, apparently connecting to an unsecured wifi network is perfectly acceptable because it's publicly broadcasting a signal, but on the other hand tracking a publicly broadcasted signal from a mobile phone is a big no-no.
Try looking past the surface. Those two positions are entirely consistent in the context of the balance of power.
When a megacorp collects data on individuals the megacorp is huge with resources vastly outclassing any of those people who themselves aren't even organized. When an individual uses an open wifi access point - at worst the balance of power is roughly equal - individual who operates the wifi and the individual using it, and in many cases it is a megacorp operating the wifi, significantly tilting the balance of power against the user.
This idea of looking at who has the power in order to determine fairness has plenty of precedent. For example, in contract disputes it is generally considered the author of the contract had the power so any ambiguities should be decided in the favor of the other party.
Either way, it's interesting information to have on individuals.
Yes. It is fundamentally naive to think that given the choice, marketers will turn down the option to collect more information on potential customers. Once that information is collected it is ripe for abuse - by the marketers, by their disgruntled employees and by the government.
If you engage in a commercial transaction that does not provide added value to you, then you are entirely at fault.
I used to think that. But then I realised that if one entity is spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to influence you to make that decision, it isn't really fair any more. They aren't putting a gun to your head, but they are actively attempting to manipulate you using resources far beyond what you have access to and that's dirty pool.
And I find you to be easily dismissive, argumentally selective
Sorry that I can't address every single one of your points, I don't have the time. I pick and choose what to respond to just as you do. For example all of the other points in that document I cited which you didn't feel where worth your time either. I do wish you would do a better job of sticking to context though - knocking down strawmen doesn't bring greater understanding to anyone.
you've demonized "the 1%" so much that you see them as the fault for everything,
The 1% run the country. I just recognise that, like all people, they operate primarily out self-interest and the interests of others tend to be neglected. That's not a problem when your sphere of influence doesn't reach much further than people you know personally. It is huge problem when your influence affects millions. That's not demonisation, that's simply calling for a commensurate exercise of responsibility.
I don't look on OWS with bias.
Citing a desire for full employment as an example of calling for wealth redistribution is so far out there that extreme bias is the only explanation that quacks like a duck.
What had focus and purpose is now a hodgepodge
Funny, everybody else who bitches about OWS claims that they lacked focus from day one. What I see is that documents like the one I cited are a coalescing of their discontent into more focused goals.
What is wrong with a software publisher saying they will stop supporting a hardware platform in a future release? Redhat and Microsoft also dropped support for Itanium.
They are not just a software publisher. They have near monopoly levels of control on the big-iron database market and they are using it to leverage their otherwise anemic hardware platform. Whether that rises to the level of "tying" that is considered anti-competitive is for the courts to determine.
I completely agree. Itanium was a boondoggle years before it shipped. But if you were stupid enough to buy into all the marketing, at least HP hasn't just abandoned you. Better to have the choice to leave than to be pushed off. Besides, nowadays the Itaniums suck much less than the first couple of generations did.
So you concede the weakness of your original claims. Good.
Student Loan freebies?
Student loan "freebies" is you yet again favoring canards over nuance. Education costs have skyrocketed over the last decade or two because the 1% were gaming the system. The kids indebted themselves following the gameplan set up by the 1% but when they came out of the other side, the 1% just screwed them by exporting jobs and waved their hands by saying "no one ever promised you a job." Yeah and Bush never said Saddam had WMDs either.
And the "jobs for all" thing is just stupid. If people (and by people, I mean corporations OR the government) could provide jobs for everyone, they would.
No they wouldn't. Corps look to minimize their own costs - everybody else be damned. They've been allowed to operate in an environment that doesn't just turn a blind eye it, it rewards them for damning the 99%. It isn't about "giving" these people jobs, its about changing the policies that encourage the elimination of local jobs.
"Healthcare for all"/single-payer is not the "original design".
Please stick to the context, I was specifically talking about the "jobs for all" goal. However if you do want to talk about healthcare -- we used to have a system where the big insurance corps weren't money-sucking leaches attached to all of us - all that "overhead" is actually counter-productive to providing healthcare for all - no matter the exact mechanism of funding. As it is now we have a "private" form of wealth redistribution that few can afford to opt out of. Yeah you can wave your hands and say that no one is forcing anyone to buy health coverage at the current exorbitant rates, except for that little thing about no one wanting to die.
In short I find your arguments superficial. You've already decided that OWS is something easily pigeonholed and instead of looking for truth and understanding all you do is look for a veneer of justification for your bias.
Since the objective of the "99%" is to have the rich pay for all of this, the wealth distribution claim remains.
Except that the difference between your tired old canard and their actual demands is significant..
Just for starters you betray significant bias when you declare "protection of the planet" and "jobs for all" as wealth redistribution. If the planet isn't being protected its only because of rapaciously poor stewardship by the 1% - its not "wealth distribution" to say stop stealing from us all.
Similarly "jobs for all" is one of the most fundamental of all american values - these people aren't demanding handouts -- they are demanding that a system that has been co-opted by the 1% for their own benefit be returned to the original design.
I've never heard of Raythorn BBN Technologies and I bet you haven't either.
Bolt, Beranek and Newman basically built the first generation of the internet. Raytheon is the single largest private employer in the state of Massachusetts. Apparently Raytheon purchased BBN - although for a while during the dotcom crazy they were called Genuity.
Give other people what THEY want, not what YOU think would be cool. This is an absurd idea.
Baloney. You might as well just give gift cards or cash with that attitude.
A gift is an opportunity to share what you think is cool with someone else on the chance that they will think it's cool too. Maybe they won't think it's cool, but that's no skin off their nose, it was free anyway...
The special software in question is only used when you want to run this (and see the output) on top of an already running OS, in a window. It's basically like VNC or RDP.
If they were really clever they would make the USB device act like a nic on a private network with the android system the only other device on the network. Then they really could just use bog-standard RDP and it would work with practically anything.
And of course the video isn't quite as you represented. The cop ran over the guy's foot first and then the guy pushed the cop over. In a park. On the grass.
Want an even funnier one? They have an OWS event ongoing at Harvard... only Harvard students involved. What are the odds of finding ONE student there who isn't a member in good standing of the 1%? To be admitted to Harvard is to automatically be admitted to the ranks of the 1%.
I'm a member of the 1% and I damn well support the OWS movement because this country needs fixing for all 100% of us and they are the only people even trying to talk about it.
I've seen the videos of the "peaceful" OWS protesters shoving police riding motorcycles to the ground and then yelling "Police Brutality" when the cop arrests them.
I sure haven't. How about providing a link or two so I can?
It's odd... I opt out and when I do the TSA employees are very, very helpful and friendly. I know that they have a strict script to stick to, but I also get the impression that they are not all that happy about the exposure risk, and are happy when others recognize the risks as well.
My niece flies a lot for work - like 2-4x a month. She always opts out, especially once she got pregnant. She said that many times the agents gave her shit for opting out, even when she told them she was pregnant. Funny thing about that, she's a model, I'd expect many agents would enjoy giving her a grope-job.
I use adblock plus with the extra add-on called "element hiding helper" and just selected the box and added it to the list of things to block. It's like it was never there.
I pay ~$4k/yr for a catastrophic policy ($5K deductible in-network, $10K deductible out of network). That's one person roughly twice 22 years old using an "umbrella corp" with a couple of hundred similar people who all buy their benefits through the same company. They have other plans with much lower deductibles and higher premiums too. As far as I know those prices are the same regardless of what state the "employee" lives in.
I wish there was a way to have an external filter in Android and iOS and whatever else comes along that thwarts LBS.
I've been mooting around the idea of a business that sold VPN access for smart-phones where the VPN's sole job was to be a "smart filter" for all the privacy destroying characteristics of most smart-phones. It would do things like zero out lat/long coordinates for the LBS, rewrite that unique ID that each phone has to be host-specific rather than universal. That sort of thing. Of course it would be configurable from the phone itself so you could turn things on and off as needed.
I haven't seen anyone else already doing that. Maybe that's because too few people value their privacy enough to make it a profitable venture.
Slashdot Mirror
Apple spends a shitton on marketing, and I have never bought an Apple product. Either I am a far stonger willed person than you, or marketing doesn't control me 100%. You decide.
Framing it as if it were an issue of being controlled 100% is just misdirection. The issue is that free markets are predicated on basis of both parties being fully informed. Marketing and other forms of manipulation explicitly seek to control how well informed the consumer is - such as requiring non-disclosures in settlements for defective products.
I do find the many conflicting faces of slashdot amusing - on one hand, apparently connecting to an unsecured wifi network is perfectly acceptable because it's publicly broadcasting a signal, but on the other hand tracking a publicly broadcasted signal from a mobile phone is a big no-no.
Try looking past the surface. Those two positions are entirely consistent in the context of the balance of power.
When a megacorp collects data on individuals the megacorp is huge with resources vastly outclassing any of those people who themselves aren't even organized. When an individual uses an open wifi access point - at worst the balance of power is roughly equal - individual who operates the wifi and the individual using it, and in many cases it is a megacorp operating the wifi, significantly tilting the balance of power against the user.
This idea of looking at who has the power in order to determine fairness has plenty of precedent. For example, in contract disputes it is generally considered the author of the contract had the power so any ambiguities should be decided in the favor of the other party.
Either way, it's interesting information to have on individuals.
Yes. It is fundamentally naive to think that given the choice, marketers will turn down the option to collect more information on potential customers. Once that information is collected it is ripe for abuse - by the marketers, by their disgruntled employees and by the government.
If you engage in a commercial transaction that does not provide added value to you, then you are entirely at fault.
I used to think that. But then I realised that if one entity is spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to influence you to make that decision, it isn't really fair any more. They aren't putting a gun to your head, but they are actively attempting to manipulate you using resources far beyond what you have access to and that's dirty pool.
And I find you to be easily dismissive, argumentally selective
Sorry that I can't address every single one of your points, I don't have the time. I pick and choose what to respond to just as you do. For example all of the other points in that document I cited which you didn't feel where worth your time either. I do wish you would do a better job of sticking to context though - knocking down strawmen doesn't bring greater understanding to anyone.
you've demonized "the 1%" so much that you see them as the fault for everything,
The 1% run the country. I just recognise that, like all people, they operate primarily out self-interest and the interests of others tend to be neglected. That's not a problem when your sphere of influence doesn't reach much further than people you know personally. It is huge problem when your influence affects millions. That's not demonisation, that's simply calling for a commensurate exercise of responsibility.
I don't look on OWS with bias.
Citing a desire for full employment as an example of calling for wealth redistribution is so far out there that extreme bias is the only explanation that quacks like a duck.
What had focus and purpose is now a hodgepodge
Funny, everybody else who bitches about OWS claims that they lacked focus from day one. What I see is that documents like the one I cited are a coalescing of their discontent into more focused goals.
What is wrong with a software publisher saying they will stop supporting a hardware platform in a future release? Redhat and Microsoft also dropped support for Itanium.
They are not just a software publisher. They have near monopoly levels of control on the big-iron database market and they are using it to leverage their otherwise anemic hardware platform. Whether that rises to the level of "tying" that is considered anti-competitive is for the courts to determine.
I completely agree. Itanium was a boondoggle years before it shipped. But if you were stupid enough to buy into all the marketing, at least HP hasn't just abandoned you. Better to have the choice to leave than to be pushed off. Besides, nowadays the Itaniums suck much less than the first couple of generations did.
So what of my other points?
So you concede the weakness of your original claims. Good.
Student Loan freebies?
Student loan "freebies" is you yet again favoring canards over nuance. Education costs have skyrocketed over the last decade or two because the 1% were gaming the system. The kids indebted themselves following the gameplan set up by the 1% but when they came out of the other side, the 1% just screwed them by exporting jobs and waved their hands by saying "no one ever promised you a job." Yeah and Bush never said Saddam had WMDs either.
And the "jobs for all" thing is just stupid. If people (and by people, I mean corporations OR the government) could provide jobs for everyone, they would.
No they wouldn't. Corps look to minimize their own costs - everybody else be damned. They've been allowed to operate in an environment that doesn't just turn a blind eye it, it rewards them for damning the 99%. It isn't about "giving" these people jobs, its about changing the policies that encourage the elimination of local jobs.
"Healthcare for all"/single-payer is not the "original design".
Please stick to the context, I was specifically talking about the "jobs for all" goal. However if you do want to talk about healthcare -- we used to have a system where the big insurance corps weren't money-sucking leaches attached to all of us - all that "overhead" is actually counter-productive to providing healthcare for all - no matter the exact mechanism of funding. As it is now we have a "private" form of wealth redistribution that few can afford to opt out of. Yeah you can wave your hands and say that no one is forcing anyone to buy health coverage at the current exorbitant rates, except for that little thing about no one wanting to die.
In short I find your arguments superficial. You've already decided that OWS is something easily pigeonholed and instead of looking for truth and understanding all you do is look for a veneer of justification for your bias.
Since the objective of the "99%" is to have the rich pay for all of this, the wealth distribution claim remains.
Except that the difference between your tired old canard and their actual demands is significant..
Just for starters you betray significant bias when you declare "protection of the planet" and "jobs for all" as wealth redistribution. If the planet isn't being protected its only because of rapaciously poor stewardship by the 1% - its not "wealth distribution" to say stop stealing from us all.
Similarly "jobs for all" is one of the most fundamental of all american values - these people aren't demanding handouts -- they are demanding that a system that has been co-opted by the 1% for their own benefit be returned to the original design.
I've never heard of Raythorn BBN Technologies and I bet you haven't either.
Bolt, Beranek and Newman basically built the first generation of the internet.
Raytheon is the single largest private employer in the state of Massachusetts.
Apparently Raytheon purchased BBN - although for a while during the dotcom crazy they were called Genuity.
Give other people what THEY want, not what YOU think would be cool. This is an absurd idea.
Baloney. You might as well just give gift cards or cash with that attitude.
A gift is an opportunity to share what you think is cool with someone else on the chance that they will think it's cool too. Maybe they won't think it's cool, but that's no skin off their nose, it was free anyway...
The special software in question is only used when you want to run this (and see the output) on top of an already running OS, in a window. It's basically like VNC or RDP.
If they were really clever they would make the USB device act like a nic on a private network with the android system the only other device on the network. Then they really could just use bog-standard RDP and it would work with practically anything.
Are you daft or just ignorant?
Clearly you are if you take random postings in a forum as indicative of consistent agreement.
How about you try something that has at least some formal level of approval within the movement like The 99 Percent Declaration.
metrics provide little insight
If only we had some kind of.... metric metric.
Sounds like ISO9000.
And of course the video isn't quite as you represented. The cop ran over the guy's foot first and then the guy pushed the cop over. In a park. On the grass.
Well since one of the few demands that seem to be consistent with the OWS crowd is that the wealth of the 1% needs to be redistributed,
Citation required.
Want an even funnier one? They have an OWS event ongoing at Harvard... only Harvard students involved. What are the odds of finding ONE student there who isn't a member in good standing of the 1%? To be admitted to Harvard is to automatically be admitted to the ranks of the 1%.
I'm a member of the 1% and I damn well support the OWS movement because this country needs fixing for all 100% of us and they are the only people even trying to talk about it.
I've seen the videos of the "peaceful" OWS protesters shoving police riding motorcycles to the ground and then yelling "Police Brutality" when the cop arrests them.
I sure haven't. How about providing a link or two so I can?
It's odd... I opt out and when I do the TSA employees are very, very helpful and friendly. I know that they have a strict script to stick to, but I also get the impression that they are not all that happy about the exposure risk, and are happy when others recognize the risks as well.
My niece flies a lot for work - like 2-4x a month. She always opts out, especially once she got pregnant. She said that many times the agents gave her shit for opting out, even when she told them she was pregnant. Funny thing about that, she's a model, I'd expect many agents would enjoy giving her a grope-job.
I use adblock plus with the extra add-on called "element hiding helper" and just selected the box and added it to the list of things to block. It's like it was never there.
I pay ~$4k/yr for a catastrophic policy ($5K deductible in-network, $10K deductible out of network). That's one person roughly twice 22 years old using an "umbrella corp" with a couple of hundred similar people who all buy their benefits through the same company. They have other plans with much lower deductibles and higher premiums too. As far as I know those prices are the same regardless of what state the "employee" lives in.
I wish there was a way to have an external filter in Android and iOS and whatever else comes along that thwarts LBS.
I've been mooting around the idea of a business that sold VPN access for smart-phones where the VPN's sole job was to be a "smart filter" for all the privacy destroying characteristics of most smart-phones. It would do things like zero out lat/long coordinates for the LBS, rewrite that unique ID that each phone has to be host-specific rather than universal. That sort of thing. Of course it would be configurable from the phone itself so you could turn things on and off as needed.
I haven't seen anyone else already doing that. Maybe that's because too few people value their privacy enough to make it a profitable venture.
From all accounts, the GPS trackers that are being seen have plenty of on-board battery to not need any connection to the vehicle wiring.
The new ones are battery powered. The ones they were using half a decade ago used the car's power.
if I questioned him he would give me a line about just happening to show up at the same time. This came complete with a smart ass smirk.
Dude, that wasn't surveillance, that was intimidation. Surveillance doesn't work if the guy being surveilled knows he is being watched.
Ummm, just when did this consent happen?
So your argument is that even human-scale searches were never consented to. I don't find that particularly convincing.
NOBODY argues that they are doing something wrong by using this system. It isn't a secret.
I sure as fuck do. I have for years because it is exactly the same problem -- as you've just pointed out.