So add another manager to support the overpaid (opinion) employees? So cost goes up even more to support these jerks who think they are worth $15 / hour but can't keep themselves from being distracted by a guy? What a great business model. Pay people way more than they are actually worth and pay someone else even more to herd them like cats?
And yet it is not compiled code. But to the layman, is any javascript, minified or not, any less "proprietary"? No, neither is the fact that there is server side code handling the assimilation of the information submitted. What exactly would be the dumbass approved alternative? Because dumbasses are the only people who could possibly make the argument the article made.
I've got cruise control which is a stage of autopilot. I would be very annoyed if I didn't have it. Idiots will be idiots no matter how idiot proof you make things. There are over 17,000 crashes per day, 100 of which have fatalities. Will those numbers be notably impacted by a tesla level 2 self driving car?
Once it's on the internet, it is there to stay. Even if you delete it moments later. It's like sending a Recall Message request when you send an incorrect email. You're really just giving everyone on the email a heads up that you screwed up, and they'll probably still have the message to read. And people will read it when they otherwise might have ignored it because they see you're trying to hide it. If you made a mistake, own up to it and it will go away faster than any cover up you can possibly come up with.
"...extortionate fee to enjoy Netflix..." instead everyone has to pay more than they were because Netflix can't pick up part of the tab anymore. GREAT MOVE!
While keeping your fixed cost service? Fine, your fixed cost service goes from $80/month to $320/month. Happy now? Or go the other direction, now backbone provider also has to not charge extra for using more bandwidth, so they eventually go bankrupt unable to keep up with capacity or maintenance, major backbones fail and the internet stops altogether.
Transparency in pay. Your prejudice is showing. Regardless, if the gap remaining has no clear cause, then taking any action based on this data is pointless. Also I don't see any margins of error listed in the main doc or the appendix. That could easily erase whatever gap if I assume the level of rigor put into this data and analysis is as mediocre as the attempt to tout their (potentially completely unnecessary) solutions. I don't necessarily have a problem with a company having transparency in pay. But that won't solve ACTUAL gender bias. It MAY be one way to expose it, but there isn't even a reasonable hypothesis to create based on the complete lack of conclusive evidence that gender bias plays any part in the gap.
While they may have built the in-app browser to keep people using Facebook app (as if people were stopping because they linked out to Chrome or whatever) it was always very annoying to view links without it. Whole new app opens in a new context. With it opening first in the in-app browser it flows way more smoothly and makes it easier to quickly assess whether I want to wait for it to load or just go back to Facebook. This change was very beneficial for a social media platform that has a large percentage of content driven by external links. And by beneficial I mean it makes the app user experience better. So nefarious intentions or not, it was a nice improvement. And people didn't actually stop using Facebook because the link opened in a native browser instead. Facebook may try to give a you a control view of as much content as it can so it doesn't feel as much like a random list of links, videos and pics held together with elmer's glue and scotch tape, but that doesn't close off that content from being accessed from outside Facebook. But whatever...
So given that, I'll go ahead and submit ideas till one sticks and they send me $40K which will result in a feasibility study consisting entirely of parties with my friends.
I mean they wouldn't then use this data to show that everyone needs backscatter scan followed by a full body cavity search would they? Or that they need more of our money to pay for additional people to guard all the dangerous objects in stores? Or that they must have access to a list of everything everyone buys everywhere to cross reference with their collection of communications?
Nah they wouldn't be doing that.
Yes, but it is important to let people know just who is out there promoting laws like this. It is rare that you get to see politicians outright show their disdain for personal liberty, so please help raise every single instance of it up for everyone to see.
Capitalism solves it perfectly. You don't want $50 a month TV, don't buy it. DONE! If enough people DO want $50 a month TV then it will stay $50 a month. DONE! If the problem you're referring to is some people can't afford cable TV, that's not actually a problem, that's just a fact. Not everyone can afford an car, so they have to figure out other methods of transportation. Not everyone can afford cable TV, so they have to figure out other methods of entertainment.
And I choose to reject your offense and substitute it with my own. Boring. Like watching any number of my friends that I am connected with on facebook go through the cycle of "OMG I LOVE HIM" to vague "WHY CAN'T YOU TRUST ANYONE" to "XYZ is single and just focusing on myself" to "OMG I LOVE HIM IDC WHAT ANYONE SAYS" over and over. It is really perpetuating the kindergarten/elementary communication style that I would hope most people would grow out of, but all the social media outlets allow a person too easy an outlet for. Things they probably wouldn't say directly to one of their friends because they'd immediately realize how juvenile it is, they will say 1000 times a day on facebook or twitter etc... Then you see celebrities acting the same way and that validates your little safe zone triggered feelings and eventually you may even start actually saying those stupid things out in public...at which time you'll find out just how much no one cares. Anyway, slashdot comments is just another social media platform and here I am blasting out my disdain for something I'm essentially doing right now.
I recommend just using a white list if it is that important to you. Blocked site includes a link to submit a site for review to be whitelisted. You could optionally review a week or month worth of web traffic and see what sites are hit the most often and add those to the whitelist ahead of time. Regardless it ends up being pretty much self policing. People won't request access to a site that they know is going to be reviewed first if they know it is not allowed at work. Review of submissions can be however frequent you think is reasonable, with the user having the onus to escalate if the need to view a new site is urgent.
That's not a small detail. That is exactly why all the posturing about "needing to do something" is all bull. Yes, it sucks that crimes, especially violent crimes, happen. But you literally cannot prevent them. Prosecute people according to the law and do your best to be vigilant in the legal enforcement of the law. Don't try to pass additional laws as if they can stop these things from happening. They can't. Even if you outlaw guns, it will happen just like this. Even if you outlaw Islam. Even if you outlaw people being in the streets at night. And based on wanting to protect my freedom, I'd rather not be breaking the law by walking around outside with or without my gun. So stop trying to pull this BS. Republicans, democrats, liberals, conservatives...just STOP.
It's more like if you leave a shim in a door on your way out of a light bulb plant, then later come back and use that door to gain access and then proceed to smash hundreds of bulbs. The shim wasn't what destroyed the light bulbs, but it sure did come in handy to let you do it when you wanted to. If the shim placed in the door then sprung to life at a predetermined time and went about smashing bulbs on its own, then that would be akin to what they were originally thinking. Overall it doesn't matter too much to the crime committed, but from a technological standpoint it means the malware had less complex behavior built into it than they were giving it credit for.
Slashdot Mirror
So add another manager to support the overpaid (opinion) employees? So cost goes up even more to support these jerks who think they are worth $15 / hour but can't keep themselves from being distracted by a guy? What a great business model. Pay people way more than they are actually worth and pay someone else even more to herd them like cats?
And yet it is not compiled code. But to the layman, is any javascript, minified or not, any less "proprietary"? No, neither is the fact that there is server side code handling the assimilation of the information submitted. What exactly would be the dumbass approved alternative? Because dumbasses are the only people who could possibly make the argument the article made.
did they actually push the button or just fail to get necessary consensus to initiate launch?
I've got cruise control which is a stage of autopilot. I would be very annoyed if I didn't have it. Idiots will be idiots no matter how idiot proof you make things. There are over 17,000 crashes per day, 100 of which have fatalities. Will those numbers be notably impacted by a tesla level 2 self driving car?
Versus a whiny engineer's personal vendetta
So because Tesla doesn't have a fully autonomous car Volvo guy's argument is more compelling than a clear FAILURE of the autonomous crash avoidance?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
That is not a terrible explanation, nor is it a terrible idea...20th century fox can't let this go to waste
Once it's on the internet, it is there to stay. Even if you delete it moments later. It's like sending a Recall Message request when you send an incorrect email. You're really just giving everyone on the email a heads up that you screwed up, and they'll probably still have the message to read. And people will read it when they otherwise might have ignored it because they see you're trying to hide it. If you made a mistake, own up to it and it will go away faster than any cover up you can possibly come up with.
"...extortionate fee to enjoy Netflix..." instead everyone has to pay more than they were because Netflix can't pick up part of the tab anymore. GREAT MOVE!
While keeping your fixed cost service? Fine, your fixed cost service goes from $80/month to $320/month. Happy now? Or go the other direction, now backbone provider also has to not charge extra for using more bandwidth, so they eventually go bankrupt unable to keep up with capacity or maintenance, major backbones fail and the internet stops altogether.
Transparency in pay. Your prejudice is showing. Regardless, if the gap remaining has no clear cause, then taking any action based on this data is pointless. Also I don't see any margins of error listed in the main doc or the appendix. That could easily erase whatever gap if I assume the level of rigor put into this data and analysis is as mediocre as the attempt to tout their (potentially completely unnecessary) solutions. I don't necessarily have a problem with a company having transparency in pay. But that won't solve ACTUAL gender bias. It MAY be one way to expose it, but there isn't even a reasonable hypothesis to create based on the complete lack of conclusive evidence that gender bias plays any part in the gap.
work as a fast food burger flipper is a way to own a home? Nope
While they may have built the in-app browser to keep people using Facebook app (as if people were stopping because they linked out to Chrome or whatever) it was always very annoying to view links without it. Whole new app opens in a new context. With it opening first in the in-app browser it flows way more smoothly and makes it easier to quickly assess whether I want to wait for it to load or just go back to Facebook. This change was very beneficial for a social media platform that has a large percentage of content driven by external links. And by beneficial I mean it makes the app user experience better. So nefarious intentions or not, it was a nice improvement. And people didn't actually stop using Facebook because the link opened in a native browser instead. Facebook may try to give a you a control view of as much content as it can so it doesn't feel as much like a random list of links, videos and pics held together with elmer's glue and scotch tape, but that doesn't close off that content from being accessed from outside Facebook. But whatever...
So given that, I'll go ahead and submit ideas till one sticks and they send me $40K which will result in a feasibility study consisting entirely of parties with my friends.
I mean they wouldn't then use this data to show that everyone needs backscatter scan followed by a full body cavity search would they? Or that they need more of our money to pay for additional people to guard all the dangerous objects in stores? Or that they must have access to a list of everything everyone buys everywhere to cross reference with their collection of communications? Nah they wouldn't be doing that.
Yes, but it is important to let people know just who is out there promoting laws like this. It is rare that you get to see politicians outright show their disdain for personal liberty, so please help raise every single instance of it up for everyone to see.
Capitalism solves it perfectly. You don't want $50 a month TV, don't buy it. DONE! If enough people DO want $50 a month TV then it will stay $50 a month. DONE! If the problem you're referring to is some people can't afford cable TV, that's not actually a problem, that's just a fact. Not everyone can afford an car, so they have to figure out other methods of transportation. Not everyone can afford cable TV, so they have to figure out other methods of entertainment.
Maybe they accidentally double tapped on your resume but had already used their free replay for the day. You should try re-sending it.
At least until they use they use that email notification to lure you to your toaster and detonate a small C4 charge!
And I choose to reject your offense and substitute it with my own. Boring. Like watching any number of my friends that I am connected with on facebook go through the cycle of "OMG I LOVE HIM" to vague "WHY CAN'T YOU TRUST ANYONE" to "XYZ is single and just focusing on myself" to "OMG I LOVE HIM IDC WHAT ANYONE SAYS" over and over. It is really perpetuating the kindergarten/elementary communication style that I would hope most people would grow out of, but all the social media outlets allow a person too easy an outlet for. Things they probably wouldn't say directly to one of their friends because they'd immediately realize how juvenile it is, they will say 1000 times a day on facebook or twitter etc... Then you see celebrities acting the same way and that validates your little safe zone triggered feelings and eventually you may even start actually saying those stupid things out in public...at which time you'll find out just how much no one cares. Anyway, slashdot comments is just another social media platform and here I am blasting out my disdain for something I'm essentially doing right now.
I recommend just using a white list if it is that important to you. Blocked site includes a link to submit a site for review to be whitelisted. You could optionally review a week or month worth of web traffic and see what sites are hit the most often and add those to the whitelist ahead of time. Regardless it ends up being pretty much self policing. People won't request access to a site that they know is going to be reviewed first if they know it is not allowed at work. Review of submissions can be however frequent you think is reasonable, with the user having the onus to escalate if the need to view a new site is urgent.
Unless one or more of them turns the user's web cam on, then I'd say many of those probably do....
That's not a small detail. That is exactly why all the posturing about "needing to do something" is all bull. Yes, it sucks that crimes, especially violent crimes, happen. But you literally cannot prevent them. Prosecute people according to the law and do your best to be vigilant in the legal enforcement of the law. Don't try to pass additional laws as if they can stop these things from happening. They can't. Even if you outlaw guns, it will happen just like this. Even if you outlaw Islam. Even if you outlaw people being in the streets at night. And based on wanting to protect my freedom, I'd rather not be breaking the law by walking around outside with or without my gun. So stop trying to pull this BS. Republicans, democrats, liberals, conservatives...just STOP.
It's more like if you leave a shim in a door on your way out of a light bulb plant, then later come back and use that door to gain access and then proceed to smash hundreds of bulbs. The shim wasn't what destroyed the light bulbs, but it sure did come in handy to let you do it when you wanted to. If the shim placed in the door then sprung to life at a predetermined time and went about smashing bulbs on its own, then that would be akin to what they were originally thinking. Overall it doesn't matter too much to the crime committed, but from a technological standpoint it means the malware had less complex behavior built into it than they were giving it credit for.