I have a 4K television, 4K BluRay player, and 150 watt sound bar at home, so I don't know what you're talking about. The only reason I would need to go to a theater is for 3D; 3D televisions are still pretty pricey (i.e. $4000). I keep complaining to my daughter that I could get a decent meal in a restaurant for the $14 they charge for a soda and popcorn in a theater... seems like pretty sketchy economics to but anything in a theater.
Has this critic been to a Cinetopia? Theaters with wine bars that seat you in living room style seating and serve you food and drinks to your seats sounds like an innovation to me. Of course, you pay through the nose for this service, so it's really only good for taking dates to that you want to impress. I'm pretty sure all their theaters are 100% digital too.
Any sufficiently advanced simulation is indistinguishable from reality. However, the corollary to this is IT DOESN'T MATTER if we're in a simulation or not, UNLESS there are glitches in the simulation we can exploit. So essentially, you ask scientists to try to find glitches in the simulation. Are there any physics we already know of that act like glitches in a simulation (double slit experiment, I'm looking at you...).
More like officers, like every else, make mistakes, especially in high-stress situations. When the mistake you make is in threat assessment, and your go-to reaction to any threat is to shoot to kill, then bad things happen... does that make you a bad person, or just a person that screwed up? Of course, making the mistake in the first place should disqualify you from continuing to work in law enforcement.
Evidence suggests that even black cops are prone to assuming black men are more dangerous than whites. Is that racism, inaccurate threat assessment, or accurate threat assessment?
Cameras don't just make police act like someone's watching. They also make suspects act like someone's watching, because they are actively collecting evidence.
It not that cops hate blacks. It's that, all other things being equal, people with dark faces are considered more threatening than people with light faces. There is another problem with all white cops working all ethnic neighborhoods; after a while an "us versus them" mentality evolves where everybody they see on the street is assumed to be a perp, but that's not just a white/black phenomenom. If all the people you saw committing crimes were black, and all the people busting them for committing crimes were white, what assumptions would you tend to make after observing this behavior for years?
Apparently recording the encounter encourage BOTH sides to be on their best behavior. Would having everybody wear google glasses make everybody in a society more polite?
The other issue is that if you are going to require a background check for EVERY gun transfer, you need to make the background check completely free, otherwise people have a strong incentive to not follow the law. Why pay a $20 fee before you give someone a $10 gun for free?
That was also my biggest disappointment with the concealed carry permit process in Oregon. It required you to pass a background test and a simple written test on the law, but there was no requirement to have any proficiency whatsoever with firearms. In fact, I'm fairly certain that someone that has never actually held a gun in their hand would have no problem getting a concealed carry permit in most states. I would prefer that people have access to the same tools that law enforcement has access to, provided they receive training comparable to what law enforcement receives first. This amateur access is bullshit and likely does more harm than good.
Yes and no. We should try to control the tools that provide leverage to make lone nuts capable of doing more damage. But ultimately, once the tool is created, it's released from Pandora's box and can never be completely locked back in again. Information not only want to be free, digital information is easily almost infinitely reproducible which makes it effectively impossible to destroy.
The real problem is that people are allowed to distribute 90% receivers without serial numbers in the first place, not that somebody made a cheap CNC machine to turn them into finished receivers. Fix the real problem, control the receivers just like finished rifles! What we currently have is a loophole that allows any decent machinist to create untracked weapons. Althought personally, I thought the whole thing was a honeypot designed to get the contact info for crackpots and terrorists in the first place; if it wasn't I might have ordered one.
In the case of Well Fargo, that actually happened to thosands of customers... they never signed up with Wells Fargo, Wells Fargo aquired their bank, apparently with a wink and a nod from the antitrust division.
Actually, single embezzlers usually are forced to resign and rewarded for staying silent, since admitting your security is so lax that insiders can easily steal from you impacts earnings more then just writing off the amount of money that was embezzled.
Copyright law provides fines that range from $200 to $150,000 for each work infringed. Actual fraud of customers, apparently the fine is "well, we'll pay back any charges our customers can actually _prove_ we charged them fradulently!" Yep, sounds fair to me!
Well, we COULD pass a law mandating that any institution that is "too big to fail" must automatically be broken up by antitrust, but unfortunately being "too big to fail" also means "being able to afford a shit ton more on lobbyists than anyone else".
Also want to read your cell phone bill every month. More than one company has tried a simple fraud wherein they send you a text message, and if you actually receive the text message, they consider that consent to start billing you $9.99 per month for their "service" of sending you a text message. My wife was on auto-payment and never opened her T-Mobile bills, so it wasn't until I "snooped" on her bills months later and asked her what this extra fee was for that she had any idea she was being scammed. Apparently, her bill going up by $10 per month didn't raise any red flags either, apparently she never looked at her checking account statements either. Why do the cell companies allow _anyone_ who knows your phone number to start billing your account without consent? I don't know... why do banks allow _anyone_ who knows your account number (the one printed on every check you write) to electronically transfer funds out of your account as if you had signed a check? Obviously, they are making a percentage on these transactions, and if somebody commits fraud, it's YOUR job to straighten it out! (By the way, my credit union would only refund the $30 fraudulently transferred out of my account if I permantely closed the account.., which also messes up all the bill auto-paying out of that account.)
Try filling out ANY credit application without giving your SSN. Without a SSN, Experian, TransUnion, and Equifax have no way of distinguishing you from the dozens of other people with the same name!
The problem with using social security numbers for authentication of anything is obvious: the number is both the user name AND password, so knowing the number proves nothing!
I bounced an electronic payment, so my mortgage company arbitrarily demanded that I pay all mortgage payments BY CHECK for a year... which also cost me certified mail charges every month. I told them to show me where I had agreed to this (they had purchased the loan from the original lender) but they never did. Basically, their opinion was "you do whatever we tell you to do, or we start foreclosure". I'd never use them again, but I have no control over who my loan gets sold to on the secondary mortgage market, do I/
Any lawyers want to comment on whether an arbitration clause you didn't actually agree to because someone else forged the contract is a legally enforceable contract? I'm going to guess that it isn't.
Yeah, "American"... as in nobody in any other country in the world ever tries to cheat or game the systems that are in place for personal benefit! First rules of business: whatever behavior you reward, you create more of. If it requires cheating to get rewarded, people will cheat. Heck, even school teachers will cheat on tests if given enough incentive: https://www.washingtonpost.com...
Oracle had a similar problem in the '90s; offered sales and marketing people huge bonuses for meeting their numbers, so they simple booked orders that customers hadn't actually approved and billed customers for time that wasn't actualy worked. My manager, Ken Ross, at Oracle Marketing pulled down a $40,000 quarterly bonus by billing customers for contractor time that wasn't actually spent working on their projects. Of course, later they had to back out all those fradulent sales and re-release all their earnings reports... not sure on whether everybody got to keep their bonuses or if anyone got fired, I was long gone myself by then.
Pretty much every bank immediately resells mortgages on the secondary market. One of my mortgages sold TWICE within a few months. That's why if you don't meet the requirements for being resold, you don't get a mortgage in the first place. They used to strongly encourage you to lie to meet the requirements, i.e. I literally had a mortgage broker tell me, "I'll have my brother come by and do the appraisal, no problem", but I believe they have been forced to clean things up a bit.
Slashdot Mirror
I have a 4K television, 4K BluRay player, and 150 watt sound bar at home, so I don't know what you're talking about. The only reason I would need to go to a theater is for 3D; 3D televisions are still pretty pricey (i.e. $4000). I keep complaining to my daughter that I could get a decent meal in a restaurant for the $14 they charge for a soda and popcorn in a theater... seems like pretty sketchy economics to but anything in a theater.
Has this critic been to a Cinetopia? Theaters with wine bars that seat you in living room style seating and serve you food and drinks to your seats sounds like an innovation to me. Of course, you pay through the nose for this service, so it's really only good for taking dates to that you want to impress. I'm pretty sure all their theaters are 100% digital too.
Any sufficiently advanced simulation is indistinguishable from reality. However, the corollary to this is IT DOESN'T MATTER if we're in a simulation or not, UNLESS there are glitches in the simulation we can exploit. So essentially, you ask scientists to try to find glitches in the simulation. Are there any physics we already know of that act like glitches in a simulation (double slit experiment, I'm looking at you...).
More like officers, like every else, make mistakes, especially in high-stress situations. When the mistake you make is in threat assessment, and your go-to reaction to any threat is to shoot to kill, then bad things happen... does that make you a bad person, or just a person that screwed up? Of course, making the mistake in the first place should disqualify you from continuing to work in law enforcement.
Evidence suggests that even black cops are prone to assuming black men are more dangerous than whites. Is that racism, inaccurate threat assessment, or accurate threat assessment?
Cameras don't just make police act like someone's watching. They also make suspects act like someone's watching, because they are actively collecting evidence.
It not that cops hate blacks. It's that, all other things being equal, people with dark faces are considered more threatening than people with light faces. There is another problem with all white cops working all ethnic neighborhoods; after a while an "us versus them" mentality evolves where everybody they see on the street is assumed to be a perp, but that's not just a white/black phenomenom. If all the people you saw committing crimes were black, and all the people busting them for committing crimes were white, what assumptions would you tend to make after observing this behavior for years?
Apparently recording the encounter encourage BOTH sides to be on their best behavior. Would having everybody wear google glasses make everybody in a society more polite?
Wouldn't a huge sieve designed to strain out the plastic catch everything else as well? Like, you know, fish and seabirds and other critters?
The other issue is that if you are going to require a background check for EVERY gun transfer, you need to make the background check completely free, otherwise people have a strong incentive to not follow the law. Why pay a $20 fee before you give someone a $10 gun for free?
That was also my biggest disappointment with the concealed carry permit process in Oregon. It required you to pass a background test and a simple written test on the law, but there was no requirement to have any proficiency whatsoever with firearms. In fact, I'm fairly certain that someone that has never actually held a gun in their hand would have no problem getting a concealed carry permit in most states. I would prefer that people have access to the same tools that law enforcement has access to, provided they receive training comparable to what law enforcement receives first. This amateur access is bullshit and likely does more harm than good.
Yes and no. We should try to control the tools that provide leverage to make lone nuts capable of doing more damage. But ultimately, once the tool is created, it's released from Pandora's box and can never be completely locked back in again. Information not only want to be free, digital information is easily almost infinitely reproducible which makes it effectively impossible to destroy.
The real problem is that people are allowed to distribute 90% receivers without serial numbers in the first place, not that somebody made a cheap CNC machine to turn them into finished receivers. Fix the real problem, control the receivers just like finished rifles! What we currently have is a loophole that allows any decent machinist to create untracked weapons. Althought personally, I thought the whole thing was a honeypot designed to get the contact info for crackpots and terrorists in the first place; if it wasn't I might have ordered one.
In the case of Well Fargo, that actually happened to thosands of customers... they never signed up with Wells Fargo, Wells Fargo aquired their bank, apparently with a wink and a nod from the antitrust division.
Actually, single embezzlers usually are forced to resign and rewarded for staying silent, since admitting your security is so lax that insiders can easily steal from you impacts earnings more then just writing off the amount of money that was embezzled.
Copyright law provides fines that range from $200 to $150,000 for each work infringed. Actual fraud of customers, apparently the fine is "well, we'll pay back any charges our customers can actually _prove_ we charged them fradulently!" Yep, sounds fair to me!
Well, we COULD pass a law mandating that any institution that is "too big to fail" must automatically be broken up by antitrust, but unfortunately being "too big to fail" also means "being able to afford a shit ton more on lobbyists than anyone else".
Also want to read your cell phone bill every month. More than one company has tried a simple fraud wherein they send you a text message, and if you actually receive the text message, they consider that consent to start billing you $9.99 per month for their "service" of sending you a text message. My wife was on auto-payment and never opened her T-Mobile bills, so it wasn't until I "snooped" on her bills months later and asked her what this extra fee was for that she had any idea she was being scammed. Apparently, her bill going up by $10 per month didn't raise any red flags either, apparently she never looked at her checking account statements either. Why do the cell companies allow _anyone_ who knows your phone number to start billing your account without consent? I don't know... why do banks allow _anyone_ who knows your account number (the one printed on every check you write) to electronically transfer funds out of your account as if you had signed a check? Obviously, they are making a percentage on these transactions, and if somebody commits fraud, it's YOUR job to straighten it out! (By the way, my credit union would only refund the $30 fraudulently transferred out of my account if I permantely closed the account.., which also messes up all the bill auto-paying out of that account.)
Try filling out ANY credit application without giving your SSN. Without a SSN, Experian, TransUnion, and Equifax have no way of distinguishing you from the dozens of other people with the same name!
The problem with using social security numbers for authentication of anything is obvious: the number is both the user name AND password, so knowing the number proves nothing!
I bounced an electronic payment, so my mortgage company arbitrarily demanded that I pay all mortgage payments BY CHECK for a year... which also cost me certified mail charges every month. I told them to show me where I had agreed to this (they had purchased the loan from the original lender) but they never did. Basically, their opinion was "you do whatever we tell you to do, or we start foreclosure". I'd never use them again, but I have no control over who my loan gets sold to on the secondary mortgage market, do I/
Any lawyers want to comment on whether an arbitration clause you didn't actually agree to because someone else forged the contract is a legally enforceable contract? I'm going to guess that it isn't.
Yeah, "American"... as in nobody in any other country in the world ever tries to cheat or game the systems that are in place for personal benefit! First rules of business: whatever behavior you reward, you create more of. If it requires cheating to get rewarded, people will cheat. Heck, even school teachers will cheat on tests if given enough incentive: https://www.washingtonpost.com...
Oracle had a similar problem in the '90s; offered sales and marketing people huge bonuses for meeting their numbers, so they simple booked orders that customers hadn't actually approved and billed customers for time that wasn't actualy worked. My manager, Ken Ross, at Oracle Marketing pulled down a $40,000 quarterly bonus by billing customers for contractor time that wasn't actually spent working on their projects. Of course, later they had to back out all those fradulent sales and re-release all their earnings reports... not sure on whether everybody got to keep their bonuses or if anyone got fired, I was long gone myself by then.
Pretty much every bank immediately resells mortgages on the secondary market. One of my mortgages sold TWICE within a few months. That's why if you don't meet the requirements for being resold, you don't get a mortgage in the first place. They used to strongly encourage you to lie to meet the requirements, i.e. I literally had a mortgage broker tell me, "I'll have my brother come by and do the appraisal, no problem", but I believe they have been forced to clean things up a bit.