Steve Arlo: There aren't any GOOD guys. You realize that, don't you? I mean: there aren't EVIL guys, and INNOCENT guys. It's just - it's just... It's just a bunch of guys.
The part I don't understand is how telecoms have a sense that content providers are getting a free ride. The last time I checked I pay for my broadband access and I also pay the content providers (some, like Google indirectly). It makes sense that telecoms would have to adjust their networks based on what their customers want to do with their service (since we are the ones paying the bill). After all I'm paying for INTERNET access not INTRANET access.
That's not mass surveillance, it only records the flight crew and it records on a loop so only the last 30 minutes or so are available at any given time. It also serves a very important purpose in case something happens to the plane.
Your idea assumes that the price-per-kb is reasonable. If you look at what people are currently charged by AT&T for "overage", you get an idea of what they think they should charge. The only reason that your "package" price-per-kb is lower is because most people don't use it all. If you only actually paid for what you use, you'd be paying a *LOT* more for it (close the the "overage" rate I expect).
If the actors/actresses didn't get these ridiculous salaries there'd be no need for so many ads.
I think that's a catch 22. If you where the star of a show making $5000 per episode and found out that each episode was turning a profit of $3,000,000 then you'd probably want a higher salary since your effort is making someone else so much money. Just like with movie actor's salaries if an actor becomes more popular more people come to see their movies and the movies make progressively more money and of course the actor would want a higher salary.
If you could subscribe only to the specific programs that you wanted, and in doing so receive them free of advertising, but pay all costs via your fees, , what would your cost per hour be?
As good as this seems on paper, along with the idea of being able to only subscribe to the channels you want I think the reality of it would suck. I believe that if the revenue model for television had always been a subscription per show or even channel basis then a lot of shows/channels would have never existed. If you look at what shows are popular now then I hope you LOVE reality TV and want to watch all 17 variations of Survivor and American Idol that would come to be. I hope you don't like sci-fi because there wouldn't be enough money in it to make any of those shows. The fact is I (and probably a lot of others) watch a LOT of TV we wouldn't pay specifically for.
Just an observation, in your post you mention "if the device is not subsidized by verizon, and is the user's personal property". Assuming that ownership of the device makes a difference, I think you could argue that he owns it either way. If I buy a phone that's worth $500 for $200 in exchange for a 2 year contract then there will be a penalty that will more than pay for the phone if I cancel. If that penalty is part of my agreement then I don't see how the phone wouldn't be considered "mine" since I've agreed to either honor my contract or reimburse them if I don't; assuming I do either of those that phone is mine.
If the shoes you bought were subsidized with taxpayer money would you still feel right about it? What if you go get free food from the homeless shelter and then turn around and sell it for profit?
A lot of countries subsidize textbooks so they cost next to nothing for the general public. This guy is profiting off of public good will.
If that's true then the sale of those items should be better controlled. If I walk into a government subsidized bookstore and they let me buy 1000 copies of the same book and walk out the door then there is a problem.
I imagine the team(s) that responded to the security threat didn't know it was a drill. I think the idea was to create the situation using a real security hole but with the cooperation of an engineer that was playing the part of a "tricked" employee to allow the vulnerability to be exploited in a realistic way. I ASSUME that the team members responsible for the creation of the exploit program were not part of the team(s) that responded to the incident.
I love Star Trek, but this isn't Star Trek. Although we should prevent accidental contamination of another ecosystem, I don't think we should freak out if it happens. Natural cross-contamination (meteors, etc) stand a good chance of being the reason there is life here on Earth.
Maybe is was an R/C plane as others have suggested and possibly it had accidentally gotten out of range of the transmitter. I know technology has changed a great deal since I was in the hobby but it used to be that if your plane/buggy got out of range of your radio the servos would stay in whatever position they were in at last contact. Even at that time there were devices available that would put the servos in a pre-programmed position in that event. I assume this has probably been built into newer hardware but maybe not and certainly a failure is not out of the question.
I think Groupon is GREAT, if you're a consumer. For businesses not so much, Groupons are expensive to offer, if I'm not mistaken the vendor pays 50% of the discount value to Groupon as a fee. So if you offer a Groupon that entiles you to $100 worth of stuff for $50, then Groupon gets $25 from the vendor for each sale. From the vendors point of view, you just got $100 worth of stuff for $25, pretty straightforward. I'm sick and tired of reading about businesses that lost money by offering a Groupons, if you did then you don't have a grasp of simple math. You simply CAN'T offer a Groupon where you lose money, if you can't meet your costs in my example for the $25 you will actually keep, then you can't make the offer.
The internet has nothing to do with this. Also, we are freely available to take nude pictures of ourselves without fear of their public display, unless we ourselves put them in the public arena. Facebook is not the public arena. It is relatively open, and that should be taken into consideration. Posting a picture to a private Facebook account is not the same as posting a picture to a public tumblr account.
True, but the bottom line is you should think hard about who you trust to protect your privacy. You can put nude pictures up on facebook and set the permissions as strictly as you want, but if facebook has a security breach (it happens), then what are you going to do? The ONLY way to keep naked pictures of you off the internet with certainty is not to take them in the first place and by that I don't mean "don't post them on the internet". I mean do not bring those images into existence, if you take digital pictures (or paper ones) and the media they are on is stolen, then you lose control of them and you have no idea where they'll wind up. Basically anything that exists either as data or as a physical object can end up "public". People would be a lot better off if they thought of the internet as having no expectation of privacy.
I mean, what he did wasn't right really...but then again, sending someone away for possibly 105 years, because he took advantage of stupid people acting STUPID? Really?
Geez, if that were the case, all of Wall Street would be locked up....at least, I guess...if what they did involved nudity too I guess.
He's not facing 105 years JUST for what he did, but for HOW MANY TIMES he did it.
It seems to me that if Lenovo goes through with this, they're going to get burned. I don't think many businesses would trust China not to peek into the data going through those Black Berrys and the devices will be dropped like hot potatoes. If Lenovo's strategy is about getting their hands on patents, then that may be an acceptable consequence to them.
"The Arch Linux distribution has been modified to run off the FreeBSD 9.0 kernel as an alternative to using Linux. The developer of Arch BSD explained his reasoning as enjoying FreeBSD while also liking the Arch Linux philosophy of a 'fast, lightweight, optimized distro,' so he sought to combine the two operating systems to have FreeBSD at its core while being encircled by Arch. The Arch BSD initiative is similar to Debian GNU/kFreeBSD."
Well, if you want it "encircled" you're gonna need another Arch. Or maybe some cowbell?
Is there anything in there saying you will be told exactly what caused their system to flag your account? I mean in detal such as what a firewall log might show, not some general "infringing activity" at such and such a time crap.
Slashdot Mirror
I predict Jack Wallen will regret that statement within 5 years
Now we know the REAL reason for the SSL push from Google.
Quote from Zero Effect:
Steve Arlo: There aren't any GOOD guys. You realize that, don't you? I mean: there aren't EVIL guys, and INNOCENT guys. It's just - it's just... It's just a bunch of guys.
The part I don't understand is how telecoms have a sense that content providers are getting a free ride. The last time I checked I pay for my broadband access and I also pay the content providers (some, like Google indirectly). It makes sense that telecoms would have to adjust their networks based on what their customers want to do with their service (since we are the ones paying the bill). After all I'm paying for INTERNET access not INTRANET access.
That's not mass surveillance, it only records the flight crew and it records on a loop so only the last 30 minutes or so are available at any given time. It also serves a very important purpose in case something happens to the plane.
"a dense husk of degenerate matter that was once a massive star long" - Lindsey Lohan?
So if I ever thought (or said) that I like you then I can't sue you (take legal action)? Tell that to anyone that's been divorced...
Your idea assumes that the price-per-kb is reasonable. If you look at what people are currently charged by AT&T for "overage", you get an idea of what they think they should charge. The only reason that your "package" price-per-kb is lower is because most people don't use it all. If you only actually paid for what you use, you'd be paying a *LOT* more for it (close the the "overage" rate I expect).
THIS.
If the actors/actresses didn't get these ridiculous salaries there'd be no need for so many ads.
I think that's a catch 22. If you where the star of a show making $5000 per episode and found out that each episode was turning a profit of $3,000,000 then you'd probably want a higher salary since your effort is making someone else so much money. Just like with movie actor's salaries if an actor becomes more popular more people come to see their movies and the movies make progressively more money and of course the actor would want a higher salary.
If you could subscribe only to the specific programs that you wanted, and in doing so receive them free of advertising, but pay all costs via your fees, , what would your cost per hour be?
As good as this seems on paper, along with the idea of being able to only subscribe to the channels you want I think the reality of it would suck. I believe that if the revenue model for television had always been a subscription per show or even channel basis then a lot of shows/channels would have never existed. If you look at what shows are popular now then I hope you LOVE reality TV and want to watch all 17 variations of Survivor and American Idol that would come to be. I hope you don't like sci-fi because there wouldn't be enough money in it to make any of those shows. The fact is I (and probably a lot of others) watch a LOT of TV we wouldn't pay specifically for.
Just an observation, in your post you mention "if the device is not subsidized by verizon, and is the user's personal property". Assuming that ownership of the device makes a difference, I think you could argue that he owns it either way. If I buy a phone that's worth $500 for $200 in exchange for a 2 year contract then there will be a penalty that will more than pay for the phone if I cancel. If that penalty is part of my agreement then I don't see how the phone wouldn't be considered "mine" since I've agreed to either honor my contract or reimburse them if I don't; assuming I do either of those that phone is mine.
And my WiFi AP does 600 megabits....
If the shoes you bought were subsidized with taxpayer money would you still feel right about it? What if you go get free food from the homeless shelter and then turn around and sell it for profit?
A lot of countries subsidize textbooks so they cost next to nothing for the general public. This guy is profiting off of public good will.
If that's true then the sale of those items should be better controlled. If I walk into a government subsidized bookstore and they let me buy 1000 copies of the same book and walk out the door then there is a problem.
I imagine the team(s) that responded to the security threat didn't know it was a drill. I think the idea was to create the situation using a real security hole but with the cooperation of an engineer that was playing the part of a "tricked" employee to allow the vulnerability to be exploited in a realistic way. I ASSUME that the team members responsible for the creation of the exploit program were not part of the team(s) that responded to the incident.
I love Star Trek, but this isn't Star Trek. Although we should prevent accidental contamination of another ecosystem, I don't think we should freak out if it happens. Natural cross-contamination (meteors, etc) stand a good chance of being the reason there is life here on Earth.
Maybe is was an R/C plane as others have suggested and possibly it had accidentally gotten out of range of the transmitter. I know technology has changed a great deal since I was in the hobby but it used to be that if your plane/buggy got out of range of your radio the servos would stay in whatever position they were in at last contact. Even at that time there were devices available that would put the servos in a pre-programmed position in that event. I assume this has probably been built into newer hardware but maybe not and certainly a failure is not out of the question.
Does it distinguish between true criminal intent and the desire to smash the display for being so nosy?
I think Groupon is GREAT, if you're a consumer. For businesses not so much, Groupons are expensive to offer, if I'm not mistaken the vendor pays 50% of the discount value to Groupon as a fee. So if you offer a Groupon that entiles you to $100 worth of stuff for $50, then Groupon gets $25 from the vendor for each sale. From the vendors point of view, you just got $100 worth of stuff for $25, pretty straightforward. I'm sick and tired of reading about businesses that lost money by offering a Groupons, if you did then you don't have a grasp of simple math. You simply CAN'T offer a Groupon where you lose money, if you can't meet your costs in my example for the $25 you will actually keep, then you can't make the offer.
What kinds of devices have we been interacting with for centuries? That's what I'd like to know.
Well, when speaking about haptic and textured feedback I think "devices" was the wrong word, I think he should have said something like "cat".
The internet has nothing to do with this. Also, we are freely available to take nude pictures of ourselves without fear of their public display, unless we ourselves put them in the public arena. Facebook is not the public arena. It is relatively open, and that should be taken into consideration. Posting a picture to a private Facebook account is not the same as posting a picture to a public tumblr account.
True, but the bottom line is you should think hard about who you trust to protect your privacy. You can put nude pictures up on facebook and set the permissions as strictly as you want, but if facebook has a security breach (it happens), then what are you going to do? The ONLY way to keep naked pictures of you off the internet with certainty is not to take them in the first place and by that I don't mean "don't post them on the internet". I mean do not bring those images into existence, if you take digital pictures (or paper ones) and the media they are on is stolen, then you lose control of them and you have no idea where they'll wind up. Basically anything that exists either as data or as a physical object can end up "public". People would be a lot better off if they thought of the internet as having no expectation of privacy.
I mean, what he did wasn't right really...but then again, sending someone away for possibly 105 years, because he took advantage of stupid people acting STUPID? Really?
Geez, if that were the case, all of Wall Street would be locked up....at least, I guess...if what they did involved nudity too I guess.
He's not facing 105 years JUST for what he did, but for HOW MANY TIMES he did it.
Is this going to make my penis bigger?
It seems to me that if Lenovo goes through with this, they're going to get burned. I don't think many businesses would trust China not to peek into the data going through those Black Berrys and the devices will be dropped like hot potatoes. If Lenovo's strategy is about getting their hands on patents, then that may be an acceptable consequence to them.
"The Arch Linux distribution has been modified to run off the FreeBSD 9.0 kernel as an alternative to using Linux. The developer of Arch BSD explained his reasoning as enjoying FreeBSD while also liking the Arch Linux philosophy of a 'fast, lightweight, optimized distro,' so he sought to combine the two operating systems to have FreeBSD at its core while being encircled by Arch. The Arch BSD initiative is similar to Debian GNU/kFreeBSD."
Well, if you want it "encircled" you're gonna need another Arch. Or maybe some cowbell?
Is there anything in there saying you will be told exactly what caused their system to flag your account? I mean in detal such as what a firewall log might show, not some general "infringing activity" at such and such a time crap.